56 réponses à ce sujet

[Xandurpein]

I think that ultimately you will have to realize that there is always a trade-off. Either you add more alternatives or you add more scripted story-telling to the events. You can't have both and not end up with a totally unwieldy number of possible events that needs voice acting, scripting and everything. It just doesn't work.



I think that with masses of choice, passage of time and everything, you'll soon end up with something close to a huge RTS where two sides a computer controlled and you can run your singel character around whacking things. There just wouldn't be any room left for story-telling.



What Bioware does way better than anyone else is to deliver good story-telling. That more or less necessitates that you cut the number of real choices to manageable size. All things considered I think DA:O had a surprizing number of alternate endings for a game like this. Pushing for more variation would simply mean less story-telling and that would hurt the game I think.



So, to answer the OP. Yup, it still works for me...

[RangerSG]

Since we're on the subject of Martin. I would submit that the reason the series has bogged down so is he's lost so many PoV's he's not sure how to tell the story anymore. The muddled mess that was AFFC is partly because of not having a good variety of PoVs to tell the story from.



I don't mind killing off main characters, but when you do, you need to have a clear direction of where the plot is going. The fact that he completely scrapped A Dance w/ Dragons and started over indicates that he isn't sure anymore.

[errant_knight]

Xandurpein wrote...

I think that ultimately you will have to realize that there is always a trade-off. Either you add more alternatives or you add more scripted story-telling to the events. You can't have both and not end up with a totally unwieldy number of possible events that needs voice acting, scripting and everything. It just doesn't work.

I think that with masses of choice, passage of time and everything, you'll soon end up with something close to a huge RTS where two sides a computer controlled and you can run your singel character around whacking things. There just wouldn't be any room left for story-telling.

What Bioware does way better than anyone else is to deliver good story-telling. That more or less necessitates that you cut the number of real choices to manageable size. All things considered I think DA:O had a surprizing number of alternate endings for a game like this. Pushing for more variation would simply mean less story-telling and that would hurt the game I think.

So, to answer the OP. Yup, it still works for me...

The story usually gets the short end of the stick in games, which is why no matter how big a world you have to wander in, it ends up feeling hollow. For me, it just doesn't matter if the story is an excuse for gameplay, rather than the entire point. My favorite part about DA is that it feels like I've been plopped down in the middle of a book.

Modifié par errant_knight, 28 janvier 2010 - 05:05 .

[soteria]

Soteria, isnt that what we have the potential for currently? with the expansion coming up if viewed as one game, its entirely possible you killed your character and are then continuing anew.
I absolutely understand the concern about why would I want to continue, prolong the removal of the first PC and it will be bad. Too short and you wont care. You want it just right so that the new player character gets a taste for wanting revenge .

Two things--first, that's IF you see the expansion and vanilla as all one continuous entity. Second, if you killed your character, that was your choice. It might have been a hard choice, but the game gives you plenty of options. In fact, only 1/4 endings results in your death. Fallout 3 spoiler ahead:  What you're talking about is just killing the main character without giving the player any choice. That's what Fallout 3 did, and it sucked, even though it was the end of the game.

Modifié par soteria, 28 janvier 2010 - 12:54 .

[Allattar1]

Interesting comments to my ideas.

For the main part criticism falls into a matter of execution of the idea. Be fair here people the ideas will not turn an rpg into something else, and are not necessarily discussed as a DA idea, just a general my ideal, or what I would do.



Anything poorly executed is not fun.

I maintain a well concieved, designed and created timer can only add to immersion not reduce immersion. Yes you will run into extra work to create more dialogues and more options. To completionists, well the idea is a tough break, sorry, but the idea is to give enough for completionists to do to do as much as possible.



The other idea that shocks people is the death of a main character as a plot/ or storytelling device. I am amused that there is so much handwaving over this idea. Its not something you can do lightly, and again the concept relies upon being correctly handled. Poorly handled wouldn't work, it would have to be perfect for it not to turn people off the game. Doesn't mean it cannot work, in fact I am encouraged by the negative replies that as a mechanism you can tell the story of a dead hero. The death of the main character can be used to tell the characters story and ideals even after they are gone.



To the OP though, is the formula still working. The worry of those over my ideas show that the formula will never die out. Its an old formula, gamers especially are very wary of change. Whilst players want new games, they like the old game with new shinies. Take MMO's, any discussion on a new mmo coming up invariably compares it to wow, and there are a large portion of players who basically want a new wow but done better. They don't want new systems, they want the old stuff that they know. Of course I fear that this leads to boredom eventually, but thats another matter.



Trust me you can go anywhere and see, WoW has this, why won't this game have it, or this system is the only way to work, WoW shows us this.



Doesn't mean there are players who aren't looking for novel or new ideas, and something completely different. I fit that bill.



Thanks for the replies all though, plus I am more convinced than ever that my ideas can change the formula and work.

[Lotion Soronarr]

A timer is a good idea, but it doesn't have to be a strict timer in the pure sense.

Consider it this way - a variabel that tracks how many active treaty quests you have. It's sorta like a real clock ticking, but without actual time. You're actions are interpreted as taking a certain ammount of time. Logicly.

Areas can change based on various flags that can be set thank to various variables.
For example - start the Circle Quest, but don't go in, go out and travel around, start antoher major quest and finish it. The game now tracks that you finished a major quest, while a important one was still active. And applies consequecens. Now here's more abominations. Some characters are dead.
Ignore the Circle again and go to Orzammar? Start and finish that qust? Go back, and the tower is now gone!

This prevents you from taking too many critical quest (quests that are logicly urgent) at the same time. Well, it doesn't prevent you really, it just gives you consequences for taking your sweet time and acting illogicly - and the more illogical you act, the more time you take, the more severe the consequences.

And all that without a real clock ticking.


Basicly:


Redcliffe quest started (RC coutner = 0)
Redcliffe quest completed (RC counter = 0)
Urn quest started (urn coutner = 0)
Circle quest started  (C coutner = 0, urn coutner = 1)    <-----
Bracilian quest started   (C counter  = 1)    <----- you taking your time, aren't you?
Braclian quest completed (C counter = 2)    <----- a lot of time apprently, here's more abominations for you!
Orzamar Quest started   (C counter = 3)     <----- do you plan on doing it? Irwing is dead now!
Orzamar quest compelted   (C counter = 4)    <----- S*** you! The whole Circle is dead!

Each main quest/area, has it's own counter and own reprocussions.
So at the end of this chain of events, the urn coutner is 5, but the consequences won't start before it reaches 6, because that's how it's set up.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 28 janvier 2010 - 12:58 .

[Allattar1]

Lol Lotion yes, timers can be applied in many ways, a nice example.