530 réponses à ce sujet

[Rawgrim]

Some people are wondering exactly that, actually. To some it's an hack and slash action game with RPG elements (or even fantasy elements), so things with Witcher are murky at best.
 

 

Action-adventure game with a level up system.

[Reymoose]

Except the problem is that Dragon Age already uses mocap in this fashion and has used mocap since Origins. They already do exactly what you're suggesting. But to capture the fidelity of something like The Last Of Us you need preset actors with preset models in a scene together.

 

Not at all. Preset scenes or modular scenes are interchangeable, the only factor that changes is the variation of model interaction, and that only comes up if it's real time. All of the companion cutscenes for example, all of the plot scenes are in fact preset actors in preset scenes.

 

You'd never have the Dorian's cutscene conversations anywhere but his library corner, for example. That is a setpiece that just will not change, and thus you can mocap a higher quality scene than the third person 'standing' conversations.

 

Mocap isn't some magic wand or anything, animators still have a ton of work to do, but Bioware hasn't caught up to the level of other developers, which I tried to imply with my point earlier. I should have clarified this point, but technically, it's the rigging in DA:I that's the culprit, it is, at best, 'stiff'. Which is how you get the 'kissing puppets' type romance scenes we hear a lot about.

 

The level of polish that you could fit in, like next-gen mocap, going over your animations,etc. is hampered by a department's workload, and budget. 

 

Back to the topic, my opinion is they could have (and should have from experience) cut unnecessary bloat that adds nothing to the experience and I'd even go so far and say cut out the multiplayer aspect of the game, to allocate more resources to polishing the fundamental portions of the game.

[scrutinizer]

You're listing RPG's that use their retro-ness as a selling point. 

What do you mean retro-ness? I'm referring to top-down RPGs, which are resurging now, mainly because the top-down formula has been mostly abandoned in the last few years. DA:I is clearly an action RPG, a member of the genre that pushed abovementioned top-downs aside. Now, many gamers and developers realize that action RPGs cannot offer enough to satisfy all the hardcore RPGs players' needs, which is why top-downs resurface again. Are they a truer form of RPGs? I don't know, it is not relevant really. All that has any significance is what a given game offers, and action RPGs have different priorities than top-down RPGs.

 

I don't know if calling something the worst ever is voicing concerns.

Don't want to be a nitpicker, but actually it's 'one of the worst from Bioware', which is quite a difference-maker.

 

I don't see that games becoming accessible to more players and expanding their story-telling capabilties and complexity as a bad thing.  I can't see DAI as some sort of betrayal because it wasn't as punishing as DAO. 

Well, I do not want to produce an elaborate response, but generally adjusting something to be more accessible means abandoning certain elements, so it 'fits all' (you cannot really have a complex battle system, since certain group of players would find this complexity inaccessible). 

I also do not really understand what do you mean by saying 'expanding their story-telling capabilities and complexity', while it's clearly not the case with DA:I. You said it yourself that making a game more accessible (which means making it less complex) is not a bad thing, so how come they expanded the complexity of their games? If you mean graphical fidelity, then yes indeed, it is more complex. However, gameplay-wise? I'm not buying that at all. Feel free to prove me wrong, but the lacking DA:I gave me an arsenal of counters to any positives you can list.

As for the story-telling, it is relative. I always say it depends on how well culturally, aesthetically and experience-wise one is developed.

To illustrate, let's say I'm 14 and the only book about vampires that I've read is Twilight. And I, as an inexperienced person, love every bit of it and deem it the best book about vampires evar. On the other end of the spectrum is a 29-year-old who's really into vampires and has been for his entire life. He read Eberto Petoia and role-played PnP World of Darkness etc. Obviously, he dismisses Twilight as an utter piece of garbage. You see my point?

In my opinion, DA:I's story is one of its weakest points (which tells a lot), with extremely weak villain, a castle that is a perfect example of Chekhov's Gun, lack of general coherency and silly dialogue that I would expect from a self-published novel written by a 12-year-old boy. I do not doubt, there are people that enjoy the story. I'm happy for them. Alas, I'm not one of them.

To your point about betrayal. Again, the series started as an RPG true to the old, retro formula. Players expected more of that, but it just never happened, as EA/Bioware had plans to push DA series in a more actionish direction. But the player's complaints are justified, at least to some extent,

 

It works, it has a little something for everyone, and it does what Bioware does best- tell a good story and create an interesting world. 

Not to me, friend.

 

Peace.

 

EDIT.

Agree with Reymoose.

[AlanC9]

Back to the topic, my opinion is they could have (and should have from experience) cut unnecessary bloat that adds nothing to the experience and I'd even go so far and say cut out the multiplayer aspect of the game, to allocate more resources to polishing the fundamental portions of the game.

How would the budget work for that? Could you reasonably project that the additional SP polishing would produce comparable revenue to what MP would bring in? And if that would be so, shouldn't they have done both?

[wolfhowwl]

I wonder if it would have helped to have dropped multiple races or at least Qunari and Dwarves.

[scrutinizer]

How would the budget work for that? Could you reasonably project that the additional SP polishing would produce comparable revenue to what MP would bring in? And if that would be so, shouldn't they have done both?

Halt!

Where's the good old "let's just make the best product we can make and its superior quality will net us money, because you know guys, people like well-done things... Guys...? Is anyone there?".

[Puddytat777]

If you are playing PC expect to have bugs!!! I mean serious bugs. You can't complete quests because you can't interact with doors. ect.. Locked out. Big problems and still waiting for a fix! Good luck, just be glad you didn't pre-order the game like I did.

[Puddytat777]

Worst game problems ever! Can't believe I wasted my money. Stuck in limbo waiting for a patch that keeps being promised!

[AlanC9]

Halt!
Where's the good old "let's just make the best product we can make and its superior quality will net us money, because you know guys, people like well-done things... Guys...? Is anyone there?".

"Make the best product we can make" is a fine slogan, yep. What's the projected budget for "the best product we can make"? How many more programmers can we hire for polishing? As many as our credit rating will allow? Are we allowed to pull everyone off of the other projects to polish DAI some more?

It'd be interesting if EA just gave Bio a pot of money and said "make this much more DA; we don't really care about projected revenues so do whatever you feel like, and even if it doesn't earn out we'll come back with another pot of money for the next one." But that isn't likely. Anyway, we'd still have had MP in that scenario, since Bio likes MP. Even when they can't find a way to work MP into a game, they've thought about it. They almost wrecked NWN over it.

[scrutinizer]

"Make the best product we can make" is a fine slogan, yep. What's the projected budget for "the best product we can make"? How many more programmers can we hire for polishing? As many as our credit rating will allow?

It'd be interesting if EA just gave Bio a pot of money and said "make this much more DA; we don't really care about projected revenues so do whatever you feel like, and even if it doesn't earn out we'll come back with another pot of money for the next one." But that isn't likely. Anyway, we'd still have had MP in that scenario, since Bio likes MP. Even when they can't find a way to work MP into a game, they've thought about it. They almost wrecked NWN over it.

Sure it's not likely, but that doesn't make it any less sad.

if Bioware had balls, they would turn to kickstarter (I know they on contract, but it's not eternal).

That's my point; as a creative person you want to make the best product you can make, not to make more money money money.

 

Peace. 

[Aurok]

It probably is, but that's not necessarily very damning considering how good Bioware games typically are.

Of the RPGs I'd say that only NWN and DA2 are competing with it for last place.

[Rawgrim]

It probably is, but that's not necessarily very damning considering how good Bioware games typically are.

Of the RPGs I'd say that only NWN and DA2 are competing with it for last place.

 

Mass Effect 3 as well. Too much auto dialogue.

[AlanC9]

Sure it's not likely, but that doesn't make it any less sad.
if Bioware had balls, they would turn to kickstarter (I know they on contract, but it's not eternal).
That's my point; as a creative person you want to make the best product you can make, not to make more money money money.

You mean walk out on Bio and start a new company? There's no real evidence that the staff has any problem with being part of EA; those who did are already gone. Bio's always wanted to play in the AAA space, even if a fraction of the fanbase likes to think of them as a niche publisher.

As for being a creative person, the old aphorism about Broadway is "there's a reason it's called show business." If you don't keep making money, you don't get to keep making games.

And none of this has much to do with whether Bio should have cut MP in order to polish the SP more.

[wolfhowwl]

Sure it's not likely, but that doesn't make it any less sad.

if Bioware had balls, they would turn to kickstarter (I know they on contract, but it's not eternal).

That's my point; as a creative person you want to make the best product you can make, not to make more money money money.

 

Peace. 

 

BioWare is outright owned by EA like DICE.

[Aurok]

"Make the best product we can make" is a fine slogan, yep. What's the projected budget for "the best product we can make"? How many more programmers can we hire for polishing? As many as our credit rating will allow? Are we allowed to pull everyone off of the other projects to polish DAI some more?It'd be interesting if EA just gave Bio a pot of money and said "make this much more DA; we don't really care about projected revenues so do whatever you feel like, and even if it doesn't earn out we'll come back with another pot of money for the next one." But that isn't likely. Anyway, we'd still have had MP in that scenario, since Bio likes MP. Even when they can't find a way to work MP into a game, they've thought about it. They almost wrecked NWN over it.

It's not likely for an EA studio. The absolute top studios more or less are working like that though. The result is games of such a consistently high quality that the obscene profits which go along with that are a given.

EA would love to have a studio talented enough to take that kind of approach with. Bioware wasn't a million miles away from Blizzard and Valve in terms of reputation for quality once, but unfortunately the first thing EA did was burn that reputation to the ground by bizarrely making them develop DA2 in about 5 minutes.

[Seraphim24]

EA would love to have a studio talented enough to take that kind of approach with. Bioware wasn't a million miles away from Blizzard and Valve in terms of reputation for quality once, but unfortunately the first thing EA did was burn that reputation to the ground by bizarrely making them develop DA2 in about 5 minutes.

 

I don't think they weren't just closer, I'd say they were better than Blizzard and Valve, at least once upon a time.

 

I still think the doctors leaving impacted their whole situation more than anything... that's just speculation though.

[Elhanan]

Let's add Champions and original Traveller. In Champions there's no such thing as loot because all abilities have to be paid for out of your character points. In Traveller there was no such thing as experience. Still RPGs?

Champions works because loot is optional (eg; Prison escapes). Traveler is not because one might never make it past CC to actually play....

[Awills]

You know I think DAI deserves to be in a new game genre. I think it should be called a FedEx RPG due to the shear number of MMO style fetch quests.

[Elhanan]

You know I think DAI deserves to be in a new game genre. I think it should be called a FedEx RPG due to the shear number of MMO style fetch quests.

Could live with it, as Fed Ex has never failed to deliver for me, while other shipping only reaches as far as my doorstep, if then.

[Awills]

Could live with it, as Fed Ex has never failed to deliver for me, while other shipping only reaches as far as my doorstep, if then.

 

I used to say that but it does happen even with companies you well respected.

[AlanC9]

It's not likely for an EA studio. The absolute top studios more or less are working like that though. The result is games of such a consistently high quality that the obscene profits which go along with that are a given.
EA would love to have a studio talented enough to take that kind of approach with. Bioware wasn't a million miles away from Blizzard and Valve in terms of reputation for quality once, but unfortunately the first thing EA did was burn that reputation to the ground by bizarrely making them develop DA2 in about 5 minutes.

Blizzard and Valve, eh. You mean the outfits with cash cows big enough to let them not really care whether any other project fails? Yeah, I can see it. This actually argues for less independence for the EA studios, rather than more.

Edit: what I meant there was that EA seems to run the subunits as if they're responsible for their own bottom lines. A couple bad games from Bio and they're toast -- hence all the anxiety here over DAI's profitability a couple of weeks ago. I've worked in a corporate structure like that, and I'm not sure it's a great fit with creative fields.

[In Exile]

Sure it's not likely, but that doesn't make it any less sad.
if Bioware had balls, they would turn to kickstarter (I know they on contract, but it's not eternal).
That's my point; as a creative person you want to make the best product you can make, not to make more money money money.

Peace.

They'd turn to kick starter to.. hope that they could raise the money to make a game on 5% of the budget and hopefully survive without starving long enough to make the same play again? Aside from a very small number of titles Kickstarter campaigns have been rather complete failures.

[In Exile]

It's not likely for an EA studio. The absolute top studios more or less are working like that though. The result is games of such a consistently high quality that the obscene profits which go along with that are a given.

EA would love to have a studio talented enough to take that kind of approach with. Bioware wasn't a million miles away from Blizzard and Valve in terms of reputation for quality once, but unfortunately the first thing EA did was burn that reputation to the ground by bizarrely making them develop DA2 in about 5 minutes.

Bioware's reputation after NWN was complete garbage. After KoTOR they were console sellouts. After ME and JE they weren't even an RPG maker. And while DAO garnered a lot of new fans it got tons of hate both pre and post release because of how MMO-like it was and how unlike BG2 it became. Really the idea Bioware had some incredible reputation is a myth - it's really just a gamer dating himself or herself to the date whatever the last Bioware game liked.

[Maverick827]

Bioware's reputation after NWN was complete garbage. After KoTOR they were console sellouts. After ME and JE they weren't even an RPG maker. And while DAO garnered a lot of new fans it got tons of hate both pre and post release because of how MMO-like it was and how unlike BG2 it became. Really the idea Bioware had some incredible reputation is a myth - it's really just a gamer dating himself or herself to the date whatever the last Bioware game liked.

 

I didn't see anyone saying that DAO was "MMO-like" back when the game was released.  DAO released right after the height of WoW, when every MMO was a WoW clone (like they're still not...) and the very phrase "MMO" was synonymous with "WoW."  

 

Anyone who compared DAO to MMOs certainly wouldn't have been doing it as a complaint, because the game looked and played absolutely nothing like WoW.

[In Exile]

I didn't see anyone saying that DAO was "MMO-like" back when the game was released. DAO released right after the height of WoW, when every MMO was a WoW clone (like they're still not...) and the very phrase "MMO" was synonymous with "WoW."

Anyone who compared DAO to MMOs certainly wouldn't have been doing it as a complaint, because the game looked and played absolutely nothing like WoW.

That's ridiculous. DAO has so many MMO-like features compared to BG2. Regenerating health and mana. Mana in the first place. Cooldowns instead of item-like use/day caps. Nebulous statistics that increase at level up with no connection to the game world.

That's putting aside that you're wrong in what MMO like means. But let's pretend you're right about that part. You're still wrong in the comparison and very much wrong in saying that DAO wasn't critizised on those grounds. This was the biggest source of hate pre-release besides the origins themselves, which also got a lot of hate for being anti-RP.