272 réponses à ce sujet

[Lianaar]

I dunno about that man. Quite a few of the companion decisions you need to make were making me sweat. Maybe they don't have an altering plot outcome in the long run, but in the moment it was intense. Blackwall for instance. That's where I took a step back to consider who I was as this Inquisitor and as a person in this world. 

 

BioWare games have never been totally about plot altering story threads. They're about making you FEEL what your character feels in that moment. With DA:I, to me, they've succeeded in spades.

I so agree with this. The role playing is about the role you play. It makes you see how things are different if YOU are different.
I bring a real life example: if I smile at my kid in the morning or yell at her, it won't change the prime minister and it won't dissolve an army, nor will it affect the name of my country. It will however make a whole lot of difference.

 

I expect the same in the game. I don't necessarily expect to have a different outcome on the large scale depending if the rock was thrown, accidentally bumped or someone was manipulated to drop it, the stone will end in the valley in either case, but the decisions mattered a lot. The fact the stone ended in the valley in the end, doesn't mean your choices didn't matter. There are things above your character, and that ads to the characters diversity.

I mean, I want to own the whole hill I live on, but nothing I can do about aside from expressing it to other people and having a reaction from them about it. How I express it will cause different reactions and might even alter my actual path in life.

 

There was quite a few heavy decisions to make. The people you were with acted very different with you if you acted different with them. At times even the options you were offered to was different based on your prior choices. These might be subtle differences, but they were differences regardless. And sine I play a role, those differences matter, just like it matters to my kid if I smile or not in the morning.

 

I do understand that this is a game we all play to have fun and not to do real life, since we have of it enough in our every days. I also know a video game will never be table top, nothing beats a table top game with a good plotter But this is really good game in terms of using table top as a pattern the game should follow.

[Lianaar]

An example of how choices in the long run subtly matter, causeing a difference, which doesn't alter the game as a whole

Spoiler

I was playing with a game with a friend being over and I was making Leliana's personal quest. There is an option where you can stop her from killing the present npc. I told her to stop, and she let the npc go. My friend asked: how did you do that? I told her the exact same line here, and she killed the npc anyway. So somewhere in the story our decisions made her accept or ignore my request on what is right or wrong. And we don't know where or when, which proves that subtle choices matter

[Abaddon_86]

Impact of decision is marginal, my character can only be a good guy, no matter whether he's lawful good, funny or slightly forceful as per dialogue wheel. I cannot be a power-mongering bastard, let alone truly evil. I don't follow the OPs weak arguments at all as they are simply not true.

[theluc76]

pen and paper ADnD is a RPG, baldurs gate, NWN 1 -2 and DAO, you have guide lines but no pre-set

 

table top Hero Quest, WOW, Aion and the other MMOs are adventure games, all is pre-set

[AshesEleven]

 

table top Hero Quest, WOW, Aion and the other MMOs are adventure games, all is pre-set

 

WoW is certainly an MMORPG, but I suspect this is a pointless discussion to have with you.  

[Lebanese Dude]

WoW is certainly an MMORPG, but I suspect this is a pointless discussion to have with you.  

 

By his logic, Civ5 is an adventure game too since the civilization entities are pre-set.

[Ieldra]

@Abaddon:

I've seen quite a bit of powermongering going on as I...

Spoiler

...ordered the assassination of people to change a noble house's succession to someone more friendly to me or to have significant holdings signed over to the Inquisition.

[Abaddon_86]

@Abaddon:

I've seen quite a bit of powermongering going on as I ordered the assassination of people to change a noble house's succession to someone more friendly to me or to have significant holdings signed over to the Inquisition. 

 

Apperently then, "powermongering" is a very relative term if you think you've seen a lot of mongering in that game.

I always try to be as much of an evil powermongering bastard as possible, so also in this game, yet I've seen little in return to keep up the immerson.

[Ashen Nedra]

To Iktovian

 

On the area thing: Crestwood has a lot more global coherence than the Hinterlands.  It's smaller and leaner and more focused. Only two quest-lines, I think?  You get to appreciate the consequences of your actions visually, as an alternative mode of storytelling, which was the explicit intention of some Bioware devs if I recall correctly (Mark Darrah in an interview perhaps?).  It was enough for me to really enjoy myself and forget for example, the "flashy" style of the visual representation of the combat -which is not appealing to me, to say the least - and represents a clear instance of said segregation, IMHO.  Very grandiloquent and not in line with the "gritty" feel of DAO.  I was kind of OK with DA2 combat; good mechanics and not too immersion-breaking.

 

The Desert (I was specifically referring to the Lost Oasis or something) : you get a link with one of the most boring fetch quest (the shards), you get an elven temple full of mysteries...Classic or overdone stuff but it worked for me.  And they did a lot more work with the level-design (really three-dimensional, and beautiful of course).  Best desert-setting, visually speaking, since Varant in Gothic 3.

 

 

Maybe you get something of this sort in the Hinterlands eventually (epilogue?), but it was too late for me.  I did the refugees quest-related (five or seven) and the village didn't change, the changes to Redcliffe after the first branch in the main story were close to non-existent (i.e the tavern is now empty and..that's all).... and the endless fetch-quest are not justified in a meaningful way, nor are they interesting story-wise, honestly.  For example, I was waiting for a nice touch on the wolves quest. Something in the line of an easter egg or the demon being special, or being inserted in a line of quests other than get the first mount.  And, no, nothing.

 

To Ieldra : Yes, immersion is the thing.  With such game segregation on such a level, there is simply a lack of global coherence that prevents me for really enjoying the well-done parts of the game, to immerse myself in it.

As for your experience, if I understand correctly; story on a limited level, and decisions having consequences are enough for you to applaud DAI as a good role-playing experience. Ok, I respect that.  Is it still a good video game though?

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

[Ieldra]

Apperently then, "powermongering" is a very relative term if you think you've seen a lot of mongering in that game.

I always try to be as much of an evil powermongering bastard as possible, so also in this game, yet I've seen little in return to keep up the immerson.

Not every story can reasonably accommodate the level of evil you find desirable. Why you'd expect a Bioware story, of all things, to do it escapes me. Having said that, the marketing campaign with that video about saving the world or leading it into ruin was misleading. And people wonder why we tend to see marketing people as dishonest by default.

[Abaddon_86]

Not every story can reasonably accommodate the level of evil you find desirable. Why you'd expect a Bioware story, of all things, to do it escapes me.

 

You didn't play the BG or NWN series, have you?

[AddeKKola]

I find this discussion interesting and thought I'd chip in with my opinion.

 

A good story can really make an RPG for me and is an important part, but it's not more important than good game mechanics. If I just wanted a story I'd read a book, which I also do when not playing games, but when I play a game I want a game.

 

For me the game-mechanics and the story have to work together and it's at its best when the story motivates why I play as I do and shapes the way I play. An example that fails at this, that immediately comes to mind, is Bioshock: Infinite. It had a nice sci-fi setting and story but there was just that horrible disconnect between game play and how the characters acted. The game was also a real grind and not really fun which made the whole game a lot worse than it could've been. A good story can make me suffer through bad game-mechanics just because I want to see the end, but it doesn't make it a good game.

 

I need a challenge in my games, a fun challenge at that. For me that's what makes the difference between a book and a game. In a book I can of course identify with the characters and become immersed in the world, but I have no say what so ever and there's no fun challenge to overcome. In an RPG that allows me to choose whichever dialogue option I wish without any performance required of me I have a hard time really seeing the character as mine. It becomes kind of like reading a book of the "Jump to page 10 if you choose to enter the room."-variety. If I choose certain dialogue options I'll just get to "read" another story line through the book.

 

That is the defining difference to me. When I am required to create my character a certain way to be allowed certain choices, that's when I build a relationship with my character. A good example of such a moment in DA:O is when you have the choice to become a blood mage (I know you can cheat, but that doesn't invalidate my point.). If I want blood magic I have to sacrifice a child, if I'm not willing to sacrifice the child to the demon I'll not become a blood mage and that portion of the game is closed off to me. That's not really a performance requirement as much as it is a moral one, but it's a fine example of story influencing the way I play.

 

If we look on the challenge side of things, the challenge could be building a balanced character that has the correct stats for fighting, but still has the correct stats for making the decisions I want to make. Maybe I can't play a stupid, low intelligence, maxed out DPS, brute and not get locked out of some decisions that require a high intelligence? Maybe I need a high explosives skill to be able to help that man disarm the bomb about to blow up his family? Maybe my extreme skill with firearms allows me to beat the difficult sharp shooting part and get the kid his teddy back? In the examples it is I who accomplish things and therefore the accomplishments mean something to me.

 

My play style should define who I am, how I tackle things and how my story plays out. Great game-mechanics allow me to become more immersed and connected to my character as well as having fun challenges to overcome. A game lacking this becomes a virtual book in which I have to, for example, mindlessly grind monsters or collect shards just to "earn" the right to turn to the next page and read it.

 

I hope I could give some insight into what makes a good RPG for me. The above piece of text is my opinion and you are free to disagree.

 

I reserve the right to any grammatical errors and spelling errors.

[Draining Dragon]

I agree. In many ways I feel like this is the most unique character I've been able to create in a role playing game. So many choices and dialogue options that allow me to make him my own.

If you've played Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate 2, Jade Empire, Knights of the Old Republic, or Dragon Age: Origins, you'll see that this game is by no means exceptional in that department.

[AddeKKola]

Just a small addendum to my previous post. If I get a game with great mechanics it can still be fun even if the story is bad, but a game with bad mechanics and a great story will never be fun to play and I'll just suffer through it to see the end.

 

That's what makes game-mechanics more important than story for me.

[luism]

I like how everyone lists the witcher 2 as this great rpg with so many choices. I bought it based on internet fan boy praise and hated the : story, fact that you had to play as Gerald, hated the controls, hated the combat, hated the inventory, only thing I liked was the things ever 38 year male old stuck with the mind of a 14 year old like the T n A and that's it.

I'd buy any witcher game as a soft porn sim and give it a play through. I've always loved pervy PC games and wish there were more. But my idea of fun combat has always been rpg baldurs gate da o and now inquisition.

Even if it's repetitive there is something so gratifying about rpg tactical, combat whole controlling a small band of adventurers

[Ashen Nedra]

To Addekkola

 

That's exactly the point I was trying to make when I wrote about lack of coherence or too much gameplay/story segregation, which is apparently a game design term I stumbled upon.  Thank you

 

A great example for me would be loot, which I refer to as equipment, since I've never tried any MMOPRGs.  When there is a coherence between gameplay and story/atmosphere, you ideally find the best equipment after a meanigful quest or defeating a difficult enemy.  Same thing for crafting, really.  You only add another layer to the equation.

[Ashen Nedra]

To Luism:

 

If you were talking to me about the Witcher series, I admit that I liked the books before playing Witcher 1, so maybe I'm biased.  I didn't mind the combat in one or two.  The ****** Twister thing is really a nod to the author of the books imho, who was a star in his own country, Poland, before being a way to attract male gamers.  Was toned down a little between 1 and 2.

 

BG2 is still my ultimate gaming experience.  Everything was perfect at the time it was released.  Party-based combat is really, really fun.

[AshesEleven]

If you've played Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate 2, Jade Empire, Knights of the Old Republic, or Dragon Age: Origins, you'll see that this game is by no means exceptional in that department.

I've played three of those, and I stand by my statement.

[Abaddon_86]

I've played three of those, and I stand by my statement.

I've played all of those (and many more CRPGs at that) except for Jade Empire and can tell you the original statement is ridiculous.

 

How would you even get the idea that DA:I, which offers you exactly three major ways to play a character, lawful good, humorous and forceful, which are all essentially the same (=good) would in any way be superior to the likes of BG2, Torment etc that actually give players the possibility to be evil, powermongering, purely good etc.? Ridiculous claim...

[AshesEleven]

I've played all of those (and many more CRPGs at that) except for Jade Empire and can tell you the original statement is ridiculous.

Cool, so we have different opinions, perspectives, and experiences. I honestly don't care if you think it's ridiculous, go seek validation for your opinions with someone else.

[Abaddon_86]

I don't need validation for I know I'm right while you are not. It's not a matter of opinion.

[AlanC9]

Impact of decision is marginal, my character can only be a good guy, no matter whether he's lawful good, funny or slightly forceful as per dialogue wheel. I cannot be a power-mongering bastard, let alone truly evil. I don't follow the OPs weak arguments at all as they are simply not true.

How would you like a CRPG to handle that?

[AlanC9]

I don't need validation for I know I'm right while you are not. It's not a matter of opinion.

No, it isn't opinion. You're just wrong. (See, we can all play that game.)

[Abaddon_86]

Well, it would help if you can truly be a ****head to people for once and mostly work for your own gain. If you really want to stick to an extremely limiting 3-way-wheel, at least make the answers 1) lawful good, 2) neutral, 3) selfish/evil. And try to design story paths that follow a certain dichotomy instead of having almost the exact same outcomes albeit with slight variations to when the the same characters do or say something or with a different character taking another characters place but essentially fulwilling the same role. Cause the latter is what happened in DA:I and also most of the times in DA2.

[Jherock]

When people talk about role playing in video games, we really mean role playing as a character that we get to create and shape rather than role playing as the character the game hands to us.

 

and no, we don't particularly care that we're not technically using the term "role playing" right =P

That doesn't apply for everyone, certainly not long-timers like me.  We don't care what people worry about, except that it messes up other people who don't know better.  Then little ones in manner then get all bent out-of-shape screaming how games aren't RPGs, which crack us up.     

We believe in being specific without being verbose or over-laden.  Eskimos have use for 20+ names for different sorts of frozen precipitation, but to the rest of the world, it's just snow.