62 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

[SlottsMachine]

^Splat. 

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

 

 

^Splat. 

 

[Joseph Warrick]

Game without companions where the primary gameplay mechanic is talking with people instead of fighting. More or less a LA Noire / graphic adventure with the character progression of an RPG, including stats. But the stats are mostly character traits. Intelligence, wisdom, perception, street-savvy etc.

[Joseph Warrick]

I wouldn't be interested in a dark souls or a fallout made by bioware. There are other companies for that.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Take away one of the few shining gems bioware games seem to do right regardless of game title? Sure, sounds like a good idea to me.

 

Let's taking platforming out of the next mario game, and have the next fallout game be set before the apocolypse in a busy, tightly packed city 3 times smaller then new vegas's map. If developers are really feeling bold, they can even take out the sense of exploration and discovery from the next elder scroll game.

 

Oh wait, they already did with elder scrolls online. Silly me.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

The real Lone Wolf:

 

[bussinrounds]

I thought op meant this Lone Wolf..

 

[Seagloom]

But they genuinely don't want to. Truly and completely - they aren't making the game they want to make when it comes to things like party tactics and such. They are making the game they think fans want them to make - whether they think those fans want an action game or a tactical game or some combination of the two. The action isn't anything exciting or worth writing home about and the party tactics are very underwhelming. The stat progression is completely removed and the Tactics system is totally neutered.

 

They are including these features when they really just want them gone. And they are including them because they think fans want them, not because they are passionate about them. They want to make a different type of game now. I don't think its really fair to anyone to try and make them better in the way I wish they were better. They are better served making a game with features they want in a game, that way they can tell if they work or not. As of now, I don't think there are many, if any, employees there now who share the same types of tastes as myself. And if they don't share the same tastes, they'll just be guessing when something is done, complete or fun... instead of enjoying it themselves, in which case they can know better when something is well implemented or if it is just being done to complete a project checklist.

 

Are we sure they are not developing games strictly for fans with no regard to their own tastes? DAO is something of a relic. It began development over five years before its release. It was a critical and commercial success. Despite that, they followed an ME model with DA2 and began nudging combat into a more action oriented direction. How can we be sure that at some point deep into DAO's development their designers had not already decided to move from that type of tactical gameplay in the future?

 

Who is to say BioWare has ever collectively desired to create party based tactical combat games? BioWare's development history has gone back and forth from the start. Baldur's Gate was their first big RPG, but it was not their first game. Neverwinter Nights, beloved as it is by some, myself included, is not tactical party-based game in the way BG and KotOR were. Then we have Jade Empire which was almost pure action.

 

I think as time went on, the folks at BioWare decided to focus on cinematic storytelling. You can see signs of it as early as BG. Party banter, cinematic cut scenes, even romances. BG2 then expanded on those concepts. KotOR was the first time they really nailed it.

 

BioWare has always struck me as a company that creates what they feel is a good idea at the time. They wanted to make a video game to capture the feel of tabletop D&D. Hence we got Baldur's Gate; which had multiplayer for that precise reason. When the success of their licensed titles gave them the capital and name recognition to risk an original IP, they went with Jade Empire. It was their first chance to do whatever they wanted. Anything at all. And they went with an action oriented wuxia inspired game. Meanwhile DAO was in development and Mass Effect came along.

 

My apologies for the history lesson I expect everyone here knows, but I cannot fathom where this idea that BioWare was this amazing old school RPG developer comes from. Even BG was not turn based. BioWare helped revitalize RPGs alongside Black Isle studios during a time everyone thought it was a dead genre on PC. They were never specifically an old school RPG developer. Nor were they ever strictly about party based tactical gameplay and number crunching character building.

 

Their work has taken on many forms. Like with many artists, they followed where their inspirations took them.

 

Developing a game is a tremendous undertaking. While I expect concessions are occasionally made for the sake of fan service, or to meet certain expectations, I do not believe it comes anywhere near them being pushed into not making the kinds of games they want to make. Were that true, I doubt their work would have been so consistently divisive following the success of Baldur's Gate. Even BG2, for all the accolades it received and watermarks it set, deviated enough from the original that there was a vocal uproar over it.

 

I still think BioWare going for a solo game would be a bad idea. In my opinion it does not play to their strengths as a developer. However, I also think they would absolutely develop that sort of game if it suited them to--even over the protestations of fans. For a company that frequently plays it safe when it comes to storytelling, they have taken some pretty big chances on design decisions over their history.

[Fast Jimmy]

Do we know that? I realize Laidlaw made those "We finally made the game we wanted to make" comments but that was bullsh*t PR.

There's a 101 comments just like that over the years, though. Like Laidlaw saying that Origins on Normal was way too hard. Or that DA:O's combat was boring. Or how enamored he gets when they talk about using the tac cam to survey the field... and then getting right back "into the action," as if that's where the player wanted to be all along, not fiddling with some overhead view but rather smashing, slashing and crashing with their uber-awesome main character.

Bioware is now mostly populated with younger employees who weren't around in the older days and who may not have even played some of the more tactical games, let alone understood what design chocies were made and why. If the senior leaders don't seem to value this type of gameplay, I'd doubt there's many left who impart that kind of stuff to the newer groups.

Mark Darrah, Aaryn Flynn, Mike Laidlaw... all senior managers at Edmonton on the DA team and all guys who, when interviewed, don't even sound like they really like RPGs as I would classify them, but rather are trying to create a game that would appeal to fans. Just from my perspective, at least.

[Fast Jimmy]

Are we sure they are not developing games strictly for fans with no regard to their own tastes? DAO is something of a relic. It began development over five years before its release. It was a critical and commercial success. Despite that, they followed an ME model with DA2 and began nudging combat into a more action oriented direction. How can we be sure that at some point deep into DAO's development their designers had not already decided to move from that type of tactical gameplay in the future?

Who is to say BioWare has ever collectively desired to create party based tactical combat games? BioWare's development history has gone back and forth from the start. Baldur's Gate was their first big RPG, but it was not their first game. Neverwinter Nights, beloved as it is by some, myself included, is not tactical party-based game in the way BG and KotOR were. Then we have Jade Empire which was almost pure action.

I think as time went on, the folks at BioWare decided to focus on cinematic storytelling. You can see signs of it as early as BG. Party banter, cinematic cut scenes, even romances. BG2 then expanded on those concepts. KotOR was the first time they really nailed it.

BioWare has always struck me as a company that creates what they feel is a good idea at the time. They wanted to make a video game to capture the feel of tabletop D&D. Hence we got Baldur's Gate; which had multiplayer for that precise reason. When the success of their licensed titles gave them the capital and name recognition to risk an original IP, they went with Jade Empire. It was their first chance to do whatever they wanted. Anything at all. And they went with an action oriented wuxia inspired game. Meanwhile DAO was in development and Mass Effect came along.

My apologies for the history lesson I expect everyone here knows, but I cannot fathom where this idea that BioWare was this amazing old school RPG developer comes from. Even BG was not turn based. BioWare helped revitalize RPGs alongside Black Isle studios during a time everyone thought it was a dead genre on PC. They were never specifically an old school RPG developer. Nor were they ever strictly about party based tactical gameplay and number crunching character building.

Their work has taken on many forms. Like with many artists, they followed where their inspirations took them.

Developing a game is a tremendous undertaking. While I expect concessions are occasionally made for the sake of fan service, or to meet certain expectations, I do not believe it comes anywhere near them being pushed into not making the kinds of games they want to make. Were that true, I doubt their work would have been so consistently divisive following the success of Baldur's Gate. Even BG2, for all the accolades it received and watermarks it set, deviated enough from the original that there was a vocal uproar over it.

I totally agree. They had a new vision for the DA series before DA:O was even out. That's why the Creative Designer, Combat Designer and Game Producer from DA:O were all already being shoved out the door as soon as the game came out. The people in charge wanted to make DA2 much more like ME, since they had assumed DA:O would be a total flop, a rehashing of a design that bankrupted companies just a few years earlier.

Yet it wound up being a big hit, which I think honestly surprised the Doctors and EA, who changed it from PC only to a console game as well in the last six months and shoved it out the door. They saw the amount of sales from consoles and said "hey, we can make a lot of money from this, way more than we thought originally."

I agree Bioware hasn't been brilliant masters in encounter design that leverages party based combat, but again... they were the only ones in the AAA market still doing it in 2009. They were the last custodians of a nearly dead form of medium. And I see now that they never really wanted to be that. Or, at least, after they cleaned house of the guys who designed those games, there was no one left who valued it as much. Which is fine - I think they just need to completely set aside the notion they have to do it, since they are only really doing it just to say they did, not because its of extreme value or importance to them.

[B.A. Broska]

A bioware game based on the 1970's japanese serial Lone Wolf and Cub? I'm on the fence about that, yet strangely intrigued.

 

Gotta admit I do love the idea of having a hero that carries a baby with him on his back and with romance arcs featuring so prominently in Bioware games I would love to see them actually make this a thing in a future game.

 

 

I suppose at least in TOB if you hook up with Aerie you get a child to take up space in your inventory.

[B.A. Broska]

This is sad.

 

What do you mean?

[Fast Jimmy]

This is sad.

I disagree, at least if you are talking about what I think you are talking about.

There are now many indie developers and studios carrying the torch of party-based WRPGs. Bioware isn't the only ones (well, still the only AAA, but that is becoming increasingly irrelevant), so people who want to do it more and have the resources to accomplish that goal are coming out of the woodwork. Bioware shouldn't be resigned to carrying a cross we mistakenly thought they wanted to carry, not when there are now more options for us as gamers. Let them make the game they want to make and let it stand on its own merits, instead of trying to be something they don't want it to be to stand in the shadow of something it will never be.


<shrug> It just seems more humane to me. Rather than beating them up for not making a game to be different in the way I like.

[SlottsMachine]

^Yeah, I don't like the old school RPG type games but its cool that Indie developers have started filling the void of a once dead genre. 

[Fast Jimmy]

Gotta admit I do love the idea of having a hero that carries a baby with him on his back and with romance arcs featuring so prominently in Bioware games I would love to see them actually make this a thing in a future game.



I suppose at least in TOB if you hook up with Aerie you get a child to take up space in your inventory.

Backpack baby FTW!

Also...

[Eternal Phoenix]

Yeah they made one. It's called Neverwinter Nights.

 
Companions exist in the game but you can only take one with you, they aren't forced upon you either. They feel more like the followers of Skyrim since they can all be permanently killed by you too.

The final expansion was more party based though as you could have two companions with you and there was banter with them too. In the final expansion to NWN, the companions felt apart of the story more than the companions in the vanilla game. You also had control of their customization unlike in the vanilla game.

[Fast Jimmy]

 
None are anything like DA. How many tactics based RPGs are there out there? Wasteland 2 forces you to control all characters (it also has a terribly boring and overly fantasy game world), so does Shadowrun (which is overly simplistic and has a nonsensically fantasy game world). The only other game I know that does what DA does is FF 12, DA's predecessor (yes, that was a serious statement).
 
And not only is it that, but the combination of that with character interaction and a fascinating game world...it meshes well together.
 
I'm not advocating beating them up for making a game they don't want to make. I just want them to say so so I can accept it for what it is, rather than have them act like they're interested in the "old ways" while putting out action combat.

 

Nah. They won't ever publicly eschew the party combat, unless they go Ultima 8 style and move towards a single-character system like this thread suggests.

 

And yes, they did a pretty good job of balancing party tactics with storytelling/character building with DA:O. And to a lesser degree, KOTOR. It could have gotten a lot deeper, both in terms of non-combat skills, specific encounter design and the need to manage the party instead of go head first with a single character and button mash your cooldowns until victory. But they did it pretty good, with all the elements combined.

 

But I'd say they aren't interested in providing this specific gameplay experience any longer. And as Seagloom pointed out, even when they were LITERALLY trying to do that, they weren't doing it with full gusto or consistently between one IP/series to the next. Its easy to see a direct path of keeping old school RPG elements alive with some rather crazy stumbling blocks in the way when, in reality, its actually more accurately just been a direct path of cinematic story-telling with various gameplay mechanics and design experimented with pretty broadly over the years. I don't see that changing with Bioware anytime soon.