236 réponses à ce sujet

[Fredward]

Here's a game design question: do you design failure to be a result of player choice (Mass Effect 2 Suicide Mission deaths) inevitable (Thessia, but envision is done better) or both?

 

Both. The thing with leaving failure completely up to the player's actions is that when they learn to move around it they generally do, which might be fine, the mere fact that failure MIGHT be possible is enough in most instances but sometimes there's not much you can  do. Thessia just sucked. But take Hawke's goal to restore his/her family to their estate and be happy and successful and stuff, that didn't fail because of anything they did or did not do, the fabric that goal was built on dissolved. It was just a shitty situation. And that could be allowed to happen because while Hawke was IMPORTANT s/he or he was not INTEGRAL like the Warden or the Inquisitor. They could not fail, could not be allowed to fail or really bad **** would happen. Which gives them that (what I consider to be) Sue-ness quality that I find so tiresome.

 

It's like the more your hero is required to save the world the less human they're allowed to be.

[ThreeF]

It has the same meaning if all your Hawkes are the same, I suppose. Though I'd have still made the same response since none of my Hawkes felt like they "had" to kill him. Wanting to and having to are very different things.

And being able to another different thing .

[Nomen Mendax]

Here's a game design question: do you design failure to be a result of player choice (Mass Effect 2 Suicide Mission deaths) inevitable (Thessia, but envision is done better) or both?

I have no problem with failure as a result of player choice or failure that is inevitable, but I think both the ME2 suicide mission and Thessia were poor attempts at handling failure for similar reasons (although Thessia was much worse than the suicide mission). Anything that happens when the PC is on-screen should follow the rules of the game and should not be a result of director fiat. This was something that DA2 did repeatedly - starting with the death of Bethany / Carver - and one of the reasons I found the game so frustrating.

[AlanC9]

I have no problem with failure as a result of player choice or failure that is inevitable, but I think both the ME2 suicide mission and Thessia were poor attempts at handling failure for similar reasons (although Thessia was much worse than the suicide mission). Anything that happens when the PC is on-screen should follow the rules of the game and should not be a result of director fiat. This was something that DA2 did repeatedly - starting with the death of Bethany / Carver - and one of the reasons I found the game so frustrating.

Which parts of the SM fail this standard? HTL deaths pass since they're off-camera. Space battle deaths are on-camera, but not in Shepard's location. Escorting deaths are off-camera too. So.... fireteam leader deaths and the final two squadmates when the platform falls? Maybe a vent fail too; I can't remember how that goes.

Note that applying this standard produces a fairly paradoxical result -- going into battle with the PC is safe, while doing anything else is not.

[JaegerBane]

Both. The thing with leaving failure completely up to the player's actions is that when they learn to move around it they generally do, which might be fine, the mere fact that failure MIGHT be possible is enough in most instances but sometimes there's not much you can  do. Thessia just sucked. But take Hawke's goal to restore his/her family to their estate and be happy and successful and stuff, that didn't fail because of anything they did or did not do, the fabric that goal was built on dissolved. It was just a shitty situation. And that could be allowed to happen because while Hawke was IMPORTANT s/he or he was not INTEGRAL like the Warden or the Inquisitor. They could not fail, could not be allowed to fail or really bad **** would happen. Which gives them that (what I consider to be) Sue-ness quality that I find so tiresome.
 
It's like the more your hero is required to save the world the less human they're allowed to be.

I'd agree on what you say about Dragon Age 2 - not just regarding his family, but realistically every major situation of note in the game (most spectacularly demonstrated by the end of Act 3, where Hawkes of all persuasions were treated to the conclusions of their quest by having everything mutate into giant monsters and explode), but Thessia ranked as one of my most enjoyable missions in the entire Mass Effect saga, principally because that mission left Shepard somewhere between complete despair and total rage, which fed into the whole endgame.

In short, I don't mind being given a no-win scenario so long as the story makes use of the resulting narrative. DA2 was relentless in its refusal to do this.

[AlanC9]

but Thessia ranked as one of my most enjoyable missions in the entire Mass Effect saga, principally because that mission left Shepard somewhere between complete despair and total rage, which fed into the whole endgame.

We should probably distinguish between the Thessia mission itself and the boss fight at the end. I believe most of the complaints are about the latter.

[Nomen Mendax]

Which parts of the SM fail this standard? HTL deaths pass since they're off-camera. Space battle deaths are on-camera, but not in Shepard's location. Escorting deaths are off-camera too. So.... fireteam leader deaths and the final two squadmates when the platform falls? Maybe a vent fail too; I can't remember how that goes.

Note that applying this standard produces a fairly paradoxical result -- going into battle with the PC is safe, while doing anything else is not.

I didn't object to some of the ME2 deaths, but you have correctly pointed out my biggest objection to the way they were handled - the one place that your squadmates could not die was in combat beside you. To me, this means there is a big problem with the basic design they have for combat. It essentially becomes a mini-game that you play to entertain yourself in between the cut-scenes where all of the important stuff happens. This is not something I like. 

 

I realize that the same objection could be made to DAO as the combat mechanics (as far as your companions dying was concerned) were pretty much the same. However, they didn't explicitly break my rule as far as I can recall (though I do have a vague memory of a relatively unimportant NPC dying that I felt I could have healed).They also cleverly dealt with possible companion deaths happening in combat since you were the one that was killing them.

 

In contrast, ME2 and DA2 emphasized that what you did in combat really didn't matter in that there were some very important on-camera events which were handled by cut-scene that should, if the system allowed it, have been handled in combat (the Qunari prisoners that are killed in front of you was another DA2 example that broke my standard, and made me yell at the computer in frustration).

 

Incidentally, I'm not suggesting that your companions should be able to die in any trivial battle, but I think it is possible to design a system where it can happen under some circumstances.

[JaegerBane]

We should probably distinguish between the Thessia mission itself and the boss fight at the end. I believe most of the complaints are about the latter.

I'm not sure I see the reason for the distinction. It is the finale of the mission. Why would one consider it seperate?

If you mean that it sucked mechanically then... I wouldn't necessarily agree but I can see what you mean. But narratively I thought it did a great job of framing what was left of Cerberus's involvement in the story.

[AlanC9]

I'm not sure I see the reason for the distinction. It is the finale of the mission. Why would one consider it seperate?

If you mean that it sucked mechanically then... I wouldn't necessarily agree but I can see what you mean. But narratively I thought it did a great job of framing what was left of Cerberus's involvement in the story.

Yeah, it's the mechanics. My point was that very few players say they mind that Shepard fails to accomplish his mission on Thessia, whereas plenty say they mind the way he fails. Though as with many ME3 complaints, it's not quite clear why people are bothered by something in ME3 that went over fine in other games. I don't recall anyone complaining about Malak pulling the same damn thing in KotOR, or Saren slipping away on Virmire.

[AlanC9]

Incidentally, I'm not suggesting that your companions should be able to die in any trivial battle, but I think it is possible to design a system where it can happen under some circumstances.

Well, without a system for this, it's difficult to imagine Bio adopting your rule. It's quite restrictive.

Wing Commander 3 had something almost workable for Bio, where wingmen would always eject and be picked up until their role in the plot is over, and after that could be shot down. But this is only workable in a linear game, obviously.

[Nomen Mendax]

Well, without a system for this, it's difficult to imagine Bio adopting your rule. It's quite restrictive.

Wing Commander 3 had something almost workable for Bio, where wingmen would always eject and be picked up until their role in the plot is over, and after that could be shot down. But this is only workable in a linear game, obviously.

I have very fond memories of the Wing Commander series (not including all of the disk swapping), and I'd forgotten what you point out about wingmen.

 

Player agency is important to me, I don't want the PC doing (or saying) things that I don't want them to do and I don't want the game doing things without PC input where it would be possible for the PC to act.

 

That doesn't mean I can't enjoy games that don't strictly follow my rule, but I do think its something that CRPGs should strive for. DA failed at this too many times for me to want to play it again.

[Malanek]

DA2 definitely had problems. I didn't like the reused areas and I thought the story in the last chapter was a mess that didn't make sense. But I still loved it as a game for the story it tried to tell and the excellently written characters. I thought the story dlc was excellent.

 

I'm struggling with DAI and haven't finished it. Not sure I ever will which will be the only Bioware game I have played other than NWN. What I don't like about it is the pacing of the story and most of the game play. It feels like a chore you grind through to get to the few brief moments of interest. It doesn't help that I think the combat is the worst of the series. There are some interesting ideas but it just doesn't come together for me. I'll try and set aside some time to try and get into it but I just never seem to want to sit down and keep playing it.

[SnakeCode]

Only Bioware gets praise for the games they could have made and the stories they tried to tell. Everyone else gets judged on the content they actually put out.

 

I actually wonder if the people who say DA2 is a masterpiece actually play any games other than Bioware titles. It seems sometimes on here that people do a playthrough of the ME trilogy, then play the DA games, then do another ME playthrough. Rinse and repeat, occasionally squeezing in a run through of KOTOR or Jade Empire.

[AlanC9]

Well, if Bio-style RPGs are what you like best, you don't have too many other options. CDPR if you can stand twitch combat and a fixed protagonist, a couple of Obsidian titles, maybe a couple of others.

[ThreeF]

Well, if Bio-style RPGs are what you like best, you don't have too many other options. CDPR if you can stand twitch combat and a fixed protagonist, a couple of Obsidian titles, maybe a couple of others.

NWN 2 was terrible as far as I remember, what else did they do?

[SnakeCode]

NWN 2 was terrible as far as I remember, what else did they do?

Alpha Protocol and KOTOR 2 I think.

[PhroXenGold]

NWN 2 was terrible as far as I remember, what else did they do?

 

The base game was, while not terrible IMO, not great (although I've long wondered if it isn't actually a parody of RPG clichés given how utterly straight it seems to be playing those clichés, something Obsidian aren't normally known for), but the first expansion, Mask of the Betrayer is fantastic. Closest thing we've ever had to another Torment.

[egalor]

I had 0 expectations

Well, I can have zero expectations towards an unknown upstart game. But since the moment I heard about DAI I had a moral right to be hyped, especially considering that the worst part of the franchise (DA2) has been left behind. I thought they could never do worse and anything ought to be better. They did though... the taint of an MMO"RPG" is lying across every location in DAI. In fact, DAI should have been re-done from scratch, instead of stuffing the obvious mmorpg content into a single player game.

 

Because of DAI though, I feel very bad for the prospect of ME4. If they do this in the same vein as DAI, this could as well bury the ME franchise as well. I don't want that.

[egalor]

The base game was, while not terrible IMO, not great (although I've long wondered if it isn't actually a parody of RPG clichés given how utterly straight it seems to be playing those clichés, something Obsidian aren't normally known for), but the first expansion, Mask of the Betrayer is fantastic. Closest thing we've ever had to another Torment.

Damn, everybody everywhere is praising the Mask of the Betrayer. I should definitely check this out... coz the base nwn2 and nwn1 (even more) were boring.

[ThreeF]

The base game was, while not terrible IMO, not great (although I've long wondered if it isn't actually a parody of RPG clichés given how utterly straight it seems to be playing those clichés, something Obsidian aren't normally known for), but the first expansion, Mask of the Betrayer is fantastic. Closest thing we've ever had to another Torment.

Yeah exactly that, I've always had and have a certain distaste for DnD games, HotU was an exception and even that I'm not sure if it's nostalgia speaking, and NWN2 had everything I don't like about such games, it did had a  "bad ending" which for me at that point was a novelty.  I think when obsidian got NWN2 project they didn't know what to do with it. Never played the expansion, though, so can't say.

 

 

Alpha Protocol and KOTOR 2 I think.

Oh, I vaguely remember playing KOTOR 2, well I mostly remember that I needed a special program to run in on my dual core at that time.

[Malanek]

Only Bioware gets praise for the games they could have made and the stories they tried to tell. Everyone else gets judged on the content they actually put out.

 

I actually wonder if the people who say DA2 is a masterpiece actually play any games other than Bioware titles. It seems sometimes on here that people do a playthrough of the ME trilogy, then play the DA games, then do another ME playthrough. Rinse and repeat, occasionally squeezing in a run through of KOTOR or Jade Empire.

Presumably that was replying to me? Put it another way I liked about 85% of the DA2 story, it just fell down in places in the last chapter. I have played lots of non-bioware games, over 500 I would guess.

[AresKeith]

Calling DA2 a masterpiece because you don't like DAI?

 

Seems legit

[AlanC9]

The base game was, while not terrible IMO, not great (although I've long wondered if it isn't actually a parody of RPG clichés given how utterly straight it seems to be playing those clichés, something Obsidian aren't normally known for),

Yeah, that was my take on it too; if not a parody, then a deliberate toying with the tropes. Note that KotOR 2, in some ways, is opposed to Star Wars itself. Which I kind of liked since the setting always struck me as kind of silly.

[wolfhowwl]

Only Bioware gets praise for the games they could have made and the stories they tried to tell. Everyone else gets judged on the content they actually put out.

 

I actually wonder if the people who say DA2 is a masterpiece actually play any games other than Bioware titles. It seems sometimes on here that people do a playthrough of the ME trilogy, then play the DA games, then do another ME playthrough. Rinse and repeat, occasionally squeezing in a run through of KOTOR or Jade Empire.

 

I see you've fortunately avoided much experience with Obsidian fanboys.

[ThreeF]

Yeah, that was my take on it too; if not a parody, then a deliberate toying with the tropes. Note that KotOR 2, in some ways, is opposed to Star Wars itself. Which I kind of liked since the setting always struck me as kind of silly.

The NWN2 writer who wrote the romances admitted that he was out of his depth and that ideally he would rather to write a romance with Bishop (as if this would be a bad idea). Deliberately toying with tropes would be, to me, something akin to Blackwall. Before  I started connecting the dots I could not believe that they had created another Casavir.