106 réponses à ce sujet

[BabyPuncher]

Frankly, when it comes down to it, central BioWare plots are really not that good. Neither was Fallout 3's central plot. Really, in mainstream fiction, very few plots hold water when put under scruntiny. Weak plots that get by because of good characters is very much the norm.

 

But Fallout 3 had strong and enjoyable sidequests that provided powerful moments and characters I ended up caring about. It had a world that did a great job of showing both the poverty and the hope of the land. It had an ending I walked away very satisfied with. (The ending of Broken Steel, not the vanilla ending.)

 

There's no need to, Fallout 3's main plot is hilariously awful. You'd actually have to try to do something worse.

 

Like Inquisition? Because even with it's problems, Fallout 3 had a better plot than Inquisition. As well as a better plot than ME 3 depending on weather you consider the krogan and quarian arcs part of the central plot or not.

[WittyUsername]

You're a joke of man sometimes, David.

 

I'm not going to derail but jesus christ Fallout 3 having DAO tier writing is an almost objectively terrible opinion

The best part of all this, the GECK was originally just a farming kit. That's it.

 

Then Fallout 3 wanted to change it into some kind of wacky scifi machine, what the tribals in Fallout 2 thought it was.

[Chealec]

No, it's still Id Software (or at least, Id Software in name). Bethesda publishes, but they're game studio only does FO/TES.

 

Spoilsport

 

Aside ... I'm actually mildly excited by what I've seen of the new Doom game - it looks like it's going back to it's roots and modernising them (much more verticality).

[PCThug]

I hope BioWare doesn't change a thing about story reveals. There was so much fun to be had watching people freak out over assumptions based on a two second scene in the trailers that ultimately were completely wrong.

[Enigmatick]

Frankly, when it comes down to it, central BioWare plots are really not that good. Neither was Fallout 3's central plot. Really, in mainstream fiction, very few plots hold water when put under scruntiny. Weak plots that get by because of good characters is very much the norm.

 

But Fallout 3 had strong and enjoyable sidequests that provided powerful moments and characters I ended up caring about. It had a world that did a great job of showing both the poverty and the hope of the land. It had an ending I walked away very satisfied with. (The ending of Broken Steel, not the vanilla ending.)

There's a difference between weak and abysmally stupid and lore breaking, the latter is FO3's. The game is a theme park with no real thought put into it, I can get into how bad some of the side quests are logic wise but frankly I think you just like the game because of the heroism™ it provided you and how it avoided any of the icky grey morality.

 

~On Topic: Should they demo the intro during the beginning of the game's marketing cycle?

[WittyUsername]

Honestly, this whole thing makes me wonder how Bioware would have handled Fallout had they bought the rights to it than Bethesda. I can see they're taking some influences from Mass Effect, but really only surface stuff, juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuust like Fallout, actually.

[Enigmatick]

Honestly, this whole thing makes me wonder how Bioware would have handled Fallout had they bought the rights to it than Bethesda. I can see they're taking some influences from Mass Effect, but really only surface stuff, juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuust like Fallout, actually.

Eh? Oh I see now. I doubt the IP would be alive BW had it, they maybe would have done something Van Burenish in the mid-late 2000s but I think that would have been it.

[BabyPuncher]

There's a difference between weak and abysmally stupid and lore breaking, the latter is FO3's. The game is a theme park with no real thought put into it, I can get into how bad some of the side quests are logic wise but frankly I think you just like the game because of the heroism™ it provided you and how it avoided any of the icky grey morality.

 

Yes. That's why I completely loved the plot of Inquisition, a game where the protagonist is the most heroic hero to ever walk the land, who literally builds an empire from nothing of out sheer awesome heroicness, who never in the entire game experiences any loss and only a paltry amount of struggle, who effortlessly defeats the snarling big bad and goes home to bed their lover, who is lovingly worshipped and praised by pretty much every aliied character in the game. I love all those things and that is why I think Inquisiton is the best plot in a video game ever and the absolute pinnacle of writing in every way possible.

 

Oh wait...

[WittyUsername]

Eh? Oh I see now. I doubt the IP would be alive BW had it, they maybe would have done something Van Burenish in the mid-late 2000s but I think that would have been it.

How come you say that? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but just want to know why you think so.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Absolutely. Everything beyond game mechanics and details about the setting is a spoiler.

I don't even want to know how many companions we get or what their names are, let alone plot details.

[Yaroub]

The only thing Bioware makes better than Bethesda is characters, the companions mainly.

 

Story content on the same level, i myself prefer Bethesda plots over the recently DA:I, ME3 ones.

[Enigmatick]

How come you say that? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but just want to know why you think so.

They seemed more interested in making their worlds at the time and I don't think they would have gotten the idea to make a third person shooter. After their independent era I doubt EA would have valued the IP anymore than 'Fountain of Dreams'.

[hotdogbsg]

I think for DA:I in particular Bioware released too much information about companions and story points. I'm hoping they tone back the information released about characters for ME:A and maybe focus more on introducing us to the universe and some of the species we're likely to encounter there.

[Enigmatick]

I think for DA:I in particular Bioware released too much information about companions and story points. I'm hoping they tone back the information released about characters for ME:A and maybe focus more on introducing us to the universe and some of the species we're likely to encounter there.

They had literally nothing else to show to be fair.

[Broganisity]

Absolutely. Everything beyond game mechanics and details about the setting is a spoiler.

I don't even want to know how many companions we get or what their names are, let alone plot details.

W-we agree on something for once?

[Sylvius the Mad]

They had literally nothing else to show to be fair.

They could have told us about the game's mechanics, except that appears to be a secret. It was like pulling teeth getting those details even after the game was released.

I don't understand why they're so eager to spoil the story and the companions (the primary drivers of roleplaying), but apparently think the mechanics would scare us away.

[wolfsite]

Lets be honest, people buy Bethesda games for Player created content.  Hell the fan-base is better at patching there games than the company itself.

[In Exile]

I avoid Bioware's marketing like the bubonic plague. Through following the game I'll learn the names of companions, but that's it. I'd never follow their marketing.

[LordSwagley]

Played through the first two Mass Effects long after their intial releases (barely heard about them before) and my reaction to things such as Shepards "death", Archangels reveal, and most of my previous companions/allies screwing me over were all very strong. Then my moron friend spoiled some details about ME3 before I could play it and it ruined a few moments for me.

On the other hand another friend of mine went into DA:I blind and was bummed when he tried to romance his favourite character Sera (he was always a bit odd) and he got shut down because well... she likes bewbz. Personally I think they should not heavily spoil story or characters, make all the romances magically bisexual, and just show us a few bits and pieces (a playthrough of a sidequest, maybe a conversation with a companion, details on the pc, etc...).

[rashie]

They could have told us about the game's mechanics, except that appears to be a secret. It was like pulling teeth getting those details even after the game was released.

I don't understand why they're so eager to spoil the story and the companions (the primary drivers of roleplaying), but apparently think the mechanics would scare us away.

Letting people in on what the vast majority of their open world content actually looked like wouldn't have done their sales any favors, its likely a reason for why story content was such a big focus in marketing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Letting people in on what the vast majority of their open world content actually looked like wouldn't have done their sales any favors, its likely a reason for why story content was such a big focus in marketing.

I just want to see the mechanics.  How does the game world work?  Release a highly detailed manual, in advance, with all the game's math in it.  Let us plan character builds and party composition.

 

But no story or character spoilers.

[WittyUsername]

They seemed more interested in making their worlds at the time and I don't think they would have gotten the idea to make a third person shooter. After their independent era I doubt EA would have valued the IP anymore than 'Fountain of Dreams'.

Good point.

Alright, let's pretend that they'd keep making the games, or at least Fallout 3. How do you think it'd look?

[pdusen]

I just want to see the mechanics.  How does the game world work?  Release a highly detailed manual, in advance, with all the game's math in it.  Let us plan character builds and party composition.
 

You'll never see that because someone needs to take the time to write it, then other people need to review it to make sure its correct, and then it could be moot anyway because changes can be happening all the way up until release, meaning what they write may never be fully accurate.

Oh, and finally, almost no one buys games because of a text like that, so its all expense for no gain.

Frankly, I don't even understand why you think this is a requirement. I'm having a hard time recalling even a single game that has ever done what you're asking for.

[pdusen]

In answer to the OP, I would have said to release no stoiry information in advance at all, because all it does is make people flip their ****. That ship has already sailed, though.