165 réponses à ce sujet

[Abriael_CG]

Bibdy wrote...
Give the community 4 years with any game complete with a toolset and they'll vastly improve on the thing. Its not fair to say the developers don't care about that stuff. The modding community doesn't have time constraints like developers do, and they aren't working for a paycheck - there's no motivation to have to cut corners to get things finished, even if you don't like the look of it. A modder can be as much of a perfectionist as they want. The only person they have to answer to, is themselves. A developer has to make sacrifices.

The problem is that when oblivion was released 4 years ago I could clearly see the same flaws I see now. They were glaring as soon as you put your foot out of jail. Bethesda cut a tons of corners, and the proof that they don't care much is that they didn't learn much from the modding community when they made Fallout 3. The same glaring flaws, despite their own community shown them what they liked by modding.

While I appreciate the fact a company gives a toolset, let us be realistic. It's not a benevolent gift from God to humanity. It's a marketing tool like any other. They do it because it's advantageous to have the community fix the troubles and lackluster parts of your games for you and because the community provides continuated content releases for the game that will ensure continuated interest and with that continuated sales. 

Will you look back on DA:O in 3-4 years with the same kind of scorn? That Bioware cut corners to release only 10% of the total content that will be available, because the entire modding community generated the other 90% of it, changing all kinds of things in the game from texture resolutions, combat mechanics, the UI, character faces, add tons of quests, dialogue and so on and so forth, and that players literally built the game and fixed it for them.

Every software house cuts corners. It's inevitable. Though, there are software houses that cut a LOT of corners and deliver the bare minimum that they need in order to succeed (expecially counting on an existing fanbase) like Bethesda, and there are software houses like Bioware, that despite having an almost rabid dedicated fanbase, cut as few corners as possible.
DA:O has some inevitable flaws, but every little corner of the world drools the manical level of attention to detail dedicated and passionate developers put into designing it.
All the characters (NPC included) are strongly characterized, and have a coherent flavor to themselves. They show study and effort in their design.
On the other hand, Oblivion shows the complete opposite. There are a few areas that are nice, but everything pretty much seems to lack attention to detail. Everything is generic and made with the same tired recycled tiles that they used to create the whole world. Almost all the characters seem to have been put together by randomly pulling and dragging sliders, without real attention to detail. Even the voice actors are so horribly recycled that you almost want to kill "generic elf 1" after a while.
And don't come to tell me that bethesda lacks the money to hire a few more voice actors.

Almost every single area in DA:O is breathtaking not only in it's look, but even in it's uniqueness and characterization.There are some very nice views in Oblivion, but they just happen to be a rather random combination of  "generic lake 1" with "generic ruins 3" and "geenric forest 2".

That's, for me, pretty much the difference between a game that got famous because of an (IMHO overrated) concept and it's prolific modding community, and a game that really shines and show a lot of effort and attention to detail, and a lot of resources and talent spent into creating it. 

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 28 janvier 2010 - 08:35 .

[vypz]

lol i used 2 really enjoy playing oblivion and i did the same thing playd da:o 2 death blew the dust off my oblivion case gave it 20 mins turned it off lol

[illerianna]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Bibdy wrote...
Give the
community 4 years with any game complete with a toolset and they'll
vastly improve on the thing. Its not fair to say the developers don't
care about that stuff. The modding community doesn't have time
constraints like developers do, and they aren't working for a paycheck
- there's no motivation to have to cut corners to get things finished,
even if you don't like the look of it. A modder can be as much of a
perfectionist as they want. The only person they have to answer to, is
themselves. A developer has to make sacrifices.

The
problem is that when oblivion was released 4 years ago I could clearly
see the same flaws I see now. They were glaring as soon as you put your
foot out of jail. Bethesda cut a tons of corners, and the
proof that they don't care much is that they didn't learn much from the
modding community when they made Fallout 3. The same glaring flaws, despite their own community shown them what they liked by modding.

While
I appreciate the fact a company gives a toolset, let us be
realistic. It's not a benevolent gift from God to humanity. It's a
marketing tool like any other. They do it because it's advantageous to
have the community fix the troubles and lackluster parts of your games
for you and because the community provides continuated content releases
for the game that will ensure continuated interest and with that
continuated sales. 

Will you look back on DA:O in 3-4
years with the same kind of scorn? That Bioware cut corners to release
only 10% of the total content that will be available, because the
entire modding community generated the other 90% of it, changing all
kinds of things in the game from texture resolutions, combat mechanics,
the UI, character faces, add tons of quests, dialogue and so on and so
forth, and that players literally built the game and fixed it for them.

Every
software house cuts corners. It's inevitable. Though, there are
software houses that cut a LOT of corners and deliver the bare minimum
that they need in order to succeed (expecially counting on an existing
fanbase) like Bethesda, and there are software houses like Bioware,
that despite having an almost rabid dedicated fanbase, cut as few
corners as possible.
DA:O has some inevitable flaws, but every
little corner of the world drools the manical level of attention to
detail dedicated and passionate developers put into designing it.
All
the characters (NPC included) are strongly characterized, and have a
coherent flavor to themselves. They show study and effort in their
design.
On the other hand, Oblivion shows the complete
opposite. There are a few areas that are nice, but everything pretty
much seems to lack attention to detail. Everything is generic and made
with the same tired recycled tiles that they used to create the whole
world. Almost all the characters seem to have been put together by
randomly pulling and dragging sliders, without real attention to
detail. Even the voice actors are so horribly recycled that you almost
want to kill "generic elf 1" after a while.

Almost every
single area in DA:O is breathtaking not only in it's look, but even in
it's uniqueness and characterization.There are some very nice views
in Oblivion, but they just happen to be a rather random combination of 
"generic lake 1" with "generic ruins 3" and "geenric forest 2".

That's,
for me, pretty much the difference between a game that got famous
because of an (IMHO overrated) concept and it's prolific modding
community, and a game that really shines and show a lot of effort and
attention to detail, and a lot of resources and talent spent into
creating it. 

As a FO3 fantard (Just as you are
obviously a BioWare fantard, I mean really, "drools"?) I can defend it
here. For Oblivion? Well... Not so much. I kinda got bored with
Oblivion after Professor Xavi-I mean Emperor something died.

As for FO3? There were plenty of great characters. Moriarty, Confessor Cromwell and the whole Church of Atom, Dad (Liam Neeson [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/heart.png[/smilie],
he made me feel guilty about blowing up Megaton), Nova & Gob (Those
two had a thing for each other, I tells ya!), Clover, Tenpenny, Roy
Phillips (The conclusion of the Tenpenny Tower quest, if you chose the
"diplomatic" solution, really made me think), the Overseer of Vault
101, Butch (Lol hairdresser lol), the entire Point Lookout DLC (I loved
the Bobbleheads/Bubbleheads, "If my kid looked like that, I'd abandon
it too," made me sadface), Braun/Betty ("Make Timmy cry" is the best
quest objective ever), and it goes on.

Though, yes, I DO admit most of the hype comes from the previous Fallout games. Does that make it bad? No. Although most die-hard FO fans hate FO3 with a passion, there are still those who love it.

But,
from your posts, I can safely assume that you honestly believe just because you
don't like it makes the game a universally horrible, horrible game.
That's cool. You don't like Bethesda, you have every right to have an
opinion. Many people don't like them. I'm sure Bethesda cries themselves to sleep at night because you don't play their games. And I'm sure most Bethesda fans could come up
with just as many reasons why BioWare sucks. This is a public forum. Different strokes for different folks. This is also a BioWare forum, and if you honestly think that because a majority of people on here (All BioWare fans, obviously) dislike Bethesda games, that this is a reasonable, unbiased portion of the gaming community, and that their distaste means Oblivion is an overhyped POS... You, my good ser, are very confusing.

Hating on Bethesda must get brownie-points around here, huh? I might have to look into that.

You can rant and rave and foam at the mouth about how all BioWare characters are "oozing with detail", but that doesn't change the fact that many people still view Alistair as that generic "pretty-boy-preteen-fantasy", or Zevran as the stereotypical effeminate elf. I'm sure I can find just as many "generic elves" in DA as I can in Oblivion.

Quit with the baseless Bethesda bashing. You've not once provided proof other than "it all looks the same to me," or "I don't like it, so nyah!". You sound like a raging fanboy crying when someone happens to like a game that you don't.

Actually, I think I should get out of here and back to gaming. I'll come back when everyone has learned to seperate opinion from fact.

Edit: To clarify...

Fact: "The skies in Oblivion are blue."

Opinion: "I do not like the shade of blue in the skies! I find it RIDICULOUS that Bethesda cut corners around the shade of the sky! It is an OUTRAGE that I have to change the sky colours myself! Dragon Age has MUCH better skies, which are OOZING with detail, and I don't have to mod them! That MUST mean BioWare > Bethesda!"

Modifié par illerianna, 28 janvier 2010 - 09:18 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

To the OP:

I have played Oblivion to death and I loved it at the time. I even made a couple of mods for it. Looking back it's like watching old movies... If you watch Alien now then you know it is a man in a suit. Still, it was a great movie when it was first released. I have that with Oblivion too.

If I look at ME1 then I see the same thing. Some things are really improved in ME2 (although I am skeptical about removing a lot of the things that were actually good). But when you hear people talk about ME1 then a lot of them talk about ME1 as if it was the worst game ever. One wonders why they bought the game in the first place.

Dragon Age is a great game. I think I enjoy it more than Oblivion. But games like Oblivion have features not found in DA:O that I love. One of its best features is its open world and its NPCs that are living in it. All of them have schedules which control when they travel, wander, work, sleep, eat, etc. You can see them interrupt whatever they are doing to gossip and continue afterward. The gossip often is about the player's adventures and accomplishments. The NPCs belong to factions (citizens, guards, guilds, etc.) which control how they react towards each other and towards the player. You have an infamy rating which also determine how NPCs behave and merchants (in combination with your mercantile skill) use it to determine the price of their products. Things like that make its world feel more alive.

[Bibdy]

I really don't think any game gets continued sales because of a toolset. Have you ever honestly not bought a game, only to hear a couple of years down the line how awesome the game's mods are and suddenly go off and get it? There's no advertising to this kind of system. You have to go looking for it yourself, so I doubt any kind of modding or toolset introduction generates a significant number of sales in the long-term.

In the short-term, perhaps, but I don't recall the toolset being a major selling point of DA:O. Not like its plastered all over the ads "Generate content for this game and join the community rah rah rah!". I genuinely think both developers have released the toolsets, purely in good-faith to their fanbase, rather than as a major selling-point. There are some games which it is, like Little Big Planet or Spore, which were designed to thrive on community content, but neither Oblivion nor Bioware are designed that way, particularly being single-player games, after all. There's no mandatory internet connection required to join in the fun the game promises. The toolset certainly wasn't included in the box for DA:O, I'm not sure about Oblivion. I honestly had no clue either had a toolset until well after I bought them, so I don't think they advertised it too well

Modifié par Bibdy, 28 janvier 2010 - 09:12 .

[Abriael_CG]

Bibdy wrote...

I really don't think any game gets continued sales because of a toolset. Have you ever honestly not bought a game, only to hear a couple of years down the line how awesome the game's mods are and suddenly go off and get it? There's no advertising to this kind of system. You have to go looking for it yourself, so I doubt any kind of modding or toolset introduction generates a significant number of sales in the long-term.

Actually there has been a study lately (it was linked on kotaku), that shows how word of mouth is one of the most important vehicles of promotion for the gaming market.
Word of mouth is exactly what make games with a very strong modding community popular. Most of my friends that got PC oblivion did so because I shown them my (and other's) mods in the last couple years. It was completely under their horizon before.
Gamers talk with each other, and an active modding community that talks to their friends, send them pictures of their modded game, blogs about it, shows off how much the game has evolved thank to modding, spread the interest for a game even quite a lot after it's release.
This not to mention all the gamers that buy the game on consoles, and after a while get envious of how much the modding community adds to the PC version of the game and finally (maybe after getting a proper gaming PC) they get the PC version themselves.

All of that adds up, and it's quite a lot of money.

This not to mention that the added benefit doesn't come only from pure sales. The fact that Oblivion is still popular now between quite a few gamers isn't definitey due to it's features. It's due to it's modding community. Continuated release of content (even if amateurial in level) means continuated interest. Continuated interest means continuated popularity of the franchise. That means that when TES V will be out, there will be a rabid fanbase ready to buy it. If TES 4 didn't have it's toolset, that fanbase would be much less rabid and much less ready to buy the next product.

So yeah, the toolset is a very valid marketing tool, on more levels than one. Bethesda (or Bioware at that) didn't give it to us out of goodwill, but simply because it's good for them.
I appreciate the gesture, but it's still a business gesture.

The toolset itself is a niche thing. So yeah, at the moment it's not really a major selling point of DAO because it's products are still in an hatching phase. Give it a year and the toolset WILL be one of the major selling points of DAO, not because of the toolset itself, but due to the large amounts of content and improvements to the game that it'll bring even to people that won't touch the toolset proper with a ten feet pole.

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 28 janvier 2010 - 09:33 .

[thegull]

I tried Oblivion, but the menus were too clunky and like Fallout, there's too much useless junk in the game (items you can pick up, like forks, that have no significance). Also, the FP sword fighting just feels off somehow. Similarly, Demon's Souls has tons of useless stuff to pick up and store (why?) with no way to sell or trade or do anything significant with. In the end, I couyldn't do Demon's Souls because I can't stand any game that punishes death with sucking away hard-earned playtime. Same to me as a hard crash that wipes out hours of play because I forgot to save it three minutes ago. DOA just does it right.

[paranoid_marv]

Oblivion is one of the few games that inspires a great amount of emotion in me. I was so excited when I bought it. I had heard so many great things. Open world rpg with an epic story and copious amounts of dungeon diving. I really wanted to love the game, but it denied my love at every turn.

I was constantly fighting with the leveling system. I didn't want a perfect character but if I payed no attention to the way I leveled, I would quickly find myself with a gimped character. The only character of importance besides the PC was killed in the first few minutes of the game. Everyone else was a nobody. The 'natural world' in Oblivion was great until you realized how buggy it made everything. The game teased me with the promise of allowing me to become a great thief, but after the thieves guild quests were completed, there were no other great heists to be had. Then there was the cowl that you get at the end of those quests that allows you to carry large amounts of loot with you. It made perfect sense to make it so that walking into town while wearing it led to being arrested, because it's not like I don't have to go into town to sell all of that loot that the cowl allowed me to carry.

I kept playing it until I could bear no more. Yet I couldn't help but think about the game while I wasn't playing it, but every time I went back I was disappointed. Oh Oblivion, I wanted to love that game. I do love Dragon Age though.

[AngryFrozenWater]

BTW: There is a rumor that BioWare and Bethesda have some kind of gentlemen's agreement. They are supposed to not release their RPGs at the same time. Not sure if that's true or not, but I do think both companies respect each other's work.

[Glorfindel7]

Well Abriael, we agree on one thing: BW puts far more effort into their games than Bethesda. Let's see, 4 months and counting on RtO. That means there must have been like 100,000 man-years of effort on DA:O and most of Edmonton must be working on the expansion (not that there is much else to do in N. Alta in winter, curl maybe). If it takes BW that kind of effort to generate a small amount of content (RtO). then you might be a little optimistic about what the modding community will be able to generate.



Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you played OB and with what mods installed?



I do think everyone recognizes that if one uses the OB 'open world' model, the level of detail will be significantly lower than the 'closed set' scripted model that BW uses. Were that it wasn't true but it is within the current technological limits. That is why I don't have much trouble with the Bethesda release the sandbox and provide the shovels and pails for others to create with. Nor do I have any problems with how Bioware does games and they are very competent (OK, maybe not, if Return to Duke Nukem is an example) at it. I'll finish this off, maybe get the expansion set then come back in a year or two to see if there is enough added content to fire the game back up. Maybe the ash wraiths will have found something by then more important to fight to the death for than a deep mushroom.

[Peeker2009]

[quote]Monica21 wrote...

[quote]Peeker2009 wrote...
Do other people call it virtual LARPing? Could you please explain what this means?

If you try too hard to define the parameters of  "RPG" then I think you are bound to invite disagreement. Who says that to be a "real"  RPG a character's reactions must all be externalised? Or that everything my character does must have a direct bearing on the story? I  am playing a role, and the best RPGs (opinion only) allow me to flesh out my character the way I want to.

Therefore, if I see my character as having a poetic sensibility (a warrior/poet if you like), then watching a beautiful sunset, or admiring a full moon (Ah Apollo...) is enhancing my role-playing experience and not just wasting time. Just because I also like to see these things myself, doesn't mean my character has to necessarily avoid them. In other words, role-playing doesn't mean you have to leave your own personality behind. Not in my book anyway.

And that book is probably the original AD&D players handbook, a game where character development and individuality was seen as probably more important than any of the stories he was involved in. Modules came and went, whereas characters evolved over years.
[/quote]

[quote]
It's not the first time I've heard or used the term, so no, I'm not the only one. As for what it means, if you decide that your character has poetic sensibilities but there is no ingame feedback for that, everything that's happening is in the player's mind. I prefer a game that relies on the ingame mechanics to develop the character, not the player.
[/quote]

Thanks for the definition,  though It seems that the term itself is more subjective (and possibly dismissive considering its context) than the definition you have given for it. I won't comment on what kind of game you prefer, there's no reason to. But you do make a clear distinction between development of the character and the player, and therefore imply that what I (and others I think) see as character development is nothing of the sort. The way I get into my own rpg character,  may not have even been considered by the developers. It may be entirely incidental, but I still see it as role-playing, and the relationship between the player and his/her character is not so easily defined.

[quote]
Nobody said you have to lose your own personality. I find it difficult to play evil characters because I don't like doing bad thing to people. I've tried playing bad characters and given up, but at least the ingame mechanic is there.
[/quote]

I also find it hard to play evil characters for the same reason. However my "ideal" rpg characters are not only defined by the moral choices they make, but by other factors I have already mentioned. For many players (many DA:O players by thje looks of it too) the clothes they wear, the hairstyle and the voice, which all have little or nothing to do with the story, are also very important. Yes, the character's appearance is visual feedback, whereas the response to a sunset is not reflected in the game itself. I would argue, however, that both are valid parts of role-playing, but we will just have to agree to disagree on that I think.

[quote]
As for "the book" you had a tabletop game and other players reacted to what you did. You didn't pretend what other players' reactions would be because they were sitting right there. That's direct feedback and the mechanic is there for it.
[/quote]

Indeed, but in my experience that wasn't the end of it. For me anyway, the game also allowed me to go off on flights of fancy, that were personal indulgences. I'm sure that all the people I played with had very different thoughts going on inside their own heads at different times, ranging from the strategic to the dream-like. Some aspects were externalised, some not. My only point is that they are all a part of role-playing regardless (my opinion only).

[quote]
For what it's worth, I've had this conversation at least a hundred times. We're not going to come to an agreement. I have a preferred style of gameplay and it's not Oblivion. That said, considering the success of Oblivion and now DA, I hope we can agree that there's room in the genre for both styles of gameplay.
[/quote]

Just for the record,  I have never expressed a preference for Oblivion over DA:O, or even "sandbox" over "story-driven". I have enjoyed many games from both camps. So, we can certainly agree that there is room for both styIes. I have stated an opinion in this thread, however, that I do think companies such as Bathsheda and Bioware could still learn a little from eachother. I don't see both styles of gameplay as being mutually exclusive, and will react when proponets of either extreme try to claim the "rpg" title, or try to pigeon-hole it, which was the only reason I responded to your post in the first place really. If I misunderstood your intentions, then I apologise.

Sorry for the length... again

Modifié par Peeker2009, 28 janvier 2010 - 10:51 .

[Wicked 702]

@illerianna I really hate defending random people I don't know on a friggin' message board but your last rant was simply retarded. If you'd spend the time actually reading through the posts you'd already know that Abriael owns Oblivion, was part of the modding community, and I'm guessing spend a considerable number of hours playing the game. In addition, I would venture a guess that he enjoyed his time playing it. Your overzealous desire to attack the individual and not the opinion essentially regresses this discussion to useless banter. I have yet to see him rant, rave, or foam at the mouth with his opinions yet. But then I've actually read this whole thread...



I fully admit that I am biased because I happen to agree with most of his points. To me, character development and story are vital to a great RPG. If I can't relate to the characters, why the hell am I assuming their role? See Final Fantasy XII for a great example of character fail. The game was fun, the mechanics worked relatively well, but the characters and story were totally lackluster. If he chooses to see similar flaws in Oblivion, as many others have agreed, I see little to rebut that point. If you want an immense world with lackluster characters and such I suggest an MMO like WoW. It's a totally different approach to "RPGs". That doesn't mean Oblivion was BAD. It just means there is room for preferences. And discussion. Thus the value of a discussion board.

[Abriael_CG]

Glorfindel7 wrote...
Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you played OB and with what mods installed?

Like... 6 months or so ago. As for mods, it's pretty much impossible to list them all. I was almost at the top limit and had to merge so many mods with each others that if I didn't i would probably be quite a lot over it.

I do think everyone recognizes that if one uses the OB 'open world' model, the level of detail will be significantly lower than the 'closed set' scripted model that BW uses.

The problem is that there's a difference between having to allocate resources efficently, and as such using a certain amount of recycling, and having every damn place in the game turned in the same generic recycle fest as all the others. Oblivion was simply the extreme example on how recycling was so over the top that it's simply shameful. An almost unassisted computer could have procedurally generated a big portion of that game's world easily. And Actually I'm not that sure that they didn't procedurally generate parts of it.

THAT much recycling and lack of detail simply isn't acceptable in my book. Sorry.

[Aleksei89]

For me modded Oblivion is still best modern rpg there is. Vanilla Oblivion sure is quite lacking in many areas. Thats why I really pity people who have/had it on console. With mods Oblivion is endless world. I for instance have 1.8gb mods installed. Thats quite a lot I know. But for people who really dont want tinker with many mods just download OOO. Its one larger mod that makes game rock.

Dragon Age is good game but for me it really is game that i can complete/play mayby 2-3 times in year. Its a game that really centers it story. Like I dont read same book every week. I dont find Dragon Age really that interesting now that I have completed it. But in Oblivion everytime I play it I can make my own story. Oblivion+mods+imagination best combination there is.

Modifié par Aleksei89, 29 janvier 2010 - 12:12 .

[Abriael_CG]

Aleksei89 wrote...

For me modded Oblivion is still best modern rpg there is. Vanilla Oblivion sure is quite lacking in many areas. Thats why I really pity people who have/had it on console. With mods Oblivion is endless world. I for instance have 1.8gb mods installed. Thats quite a lot I know. But for people who really dont want tinker with many mods just download OOO. Its one larger mod that makes game rock.

1.8 gigs quite a lot? Lol. My oblivion installation is 46 gigs... Just checked now.

[Glorfindel7]

Yup, when single texture pack mods run to 2 gigs, then 1.8 gigs of mods is a bit light. Like Abriael, I run close to 50 gigs.



And Abriael, I fully understand where you believe OB falls short - as it certainly will compared to DA:O on many levels. What I am uncertain of is whether you understand where I believe DA:O falls far short of 'great'. Not that it is important, since this is all about personal taste. Doesn't stop me from thoroughly enjoying the experience but I won't be one of those people who have 10+ playthroughs. Afraid it will be one and done for me until there is more content in the game.

[Aleksei89]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Aleksei89 wrote...

For me modded Oblivion is still best modern rpg there is. Vanilla Oblivion sure is quite lacking in many areas. Thats why I really pity people who have/had it on console. With mods Oblivion is endless world. I for instance have 1.8gb mods installed. Thats quite a lot I know. But for people who really dont want tinker with many mods just download OOO. Its one larger mod that makes game rock.

1.8 gigs quite a lot? Lol. My oblivion installation is 46 gigs... Just checked now.

With that challenge I had to  make sure about my own numbers. 

http://img9.imagesha...3/oblivionw.jpg

Formated recently computer so I dont have them all installed. seems I have 2.21gb when they are packed. Have to reinstal Oblivion and see how large game folder grows.

[illerianna]

Although I do love FO3... I just could not get into Oblivion.



At all.



My reaction was this:



"Oooh, I can be a kitty!"

"Holy Jesus, these hairstyles suck" (Nobody mods Khajiit hairs :< )

"Why am I in prison? STFU about the mice, random dark elf."

"OH MY GOD! Patrick Stewart! Hi! "

"Yeah yeah, FPS mode with swords, whoop de doo.

"They killed Picard! D:< "

"Wtf is this excuse for a plot?"



I then stole a horse and fell asleep. Were it not for the fact that the mess of an "intro" made me want to kick babies, I might have like Oblivion. Just maybe. But, sadly, being a cute, fluffy kitty with poor taste in hairstyle was not enough for me. Perhaps for some people (considering my D&D group loves TES), but not me. (Also, what drunk guy made up the mount controls? DO NOT WANT.)



That's just my opinion, anyhow. I'm sure it is a great game, and much like FO3, the best part lies after the intro.

[SleeplessInSigil]

Let's be objective.


Every medium that tells an story, has a different Characters:Setting ratio.

Some Settings enhance their characters, others repress them. Some Characters steal the focus from their settings, whereas some characters exist only to explore them.

• Dragon Age: Origins, has a complex and fleshed-out Setting, highlighted Characters, but it has a rather simple plot - Unite four kingdoms and kill the Dragon? Very little, if at all, room for variation, except in the order you recruit those Kingdoms in.
  
  The side-quests, if they can be called that, appear pretty much tacked-on as an afterthought.

• Fallout 3, has a complex and fleshed-out Setting as well, but one that by its nature more-or-less oppresses the characters taking part in it. A simple main-storyline but lots of intricate side-quests with numerous ways to accomplish them (i.e. Tenpenny's.)
  
  Look at it as the science-fiction version of Dark Sun rather than Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. If you prefer to be sat on a knee and read some bedtime story about dwarves and elves, there are elements in FO3 that will attempt to cater to you, such as providing a rails-track from start to finish, but if you stick solely to those elements, you will be disappointed.

Also, there's apparently 3 major divisions on the Linearity:Freedom scale in CRPGs:

• On one end, you get games like Fallout 3: Unparalleled freedom of exploration, with a very wide margin for playing absolute Good or Evil, while permitting greater experimentation in combat, often to very satisfying results. Dynamic NPCs that have their own lives, and with behavior and dialog which change to reflect the events you took part in.
  
  You can complete most quests without going through any intermediate steps, even if you had not acquired the Quests yet.

• In the middle, you get BioWare, Infinity Engine and most other Western RPGs: Some freedom in role-play, but ultimately acting within a pre-packaged template, together with some illusion of freedom in travel: there are numerous "checkpoints" that you have to pass through for extended periods of time:
  
  Origin -> [Ostagar -> Wilds -> Lothering] -> [Brecilian/Orzammar/Redcliffe/Tower] -> Denerim. That's it.
  
  Whereas Baldur's Gate II offered you some "forks" (choices between mutually-exclusive chapters and locations in the story) Dragon Age has none. The progression itself is pretty much linear, except if you sidetrack once into the excellent Stone Prisoner DLC, and other characters' "personal" quests.
  
  NPCs tend to be little more than static signposts nailed into the ground, waiting to be read some mandatory pieces of dialog off from.

• On the other end of the scale, you have JRPGs like Final Fantasy: A very static but highly-involved story that you are more-or-less carried through "on rails," with greatly emphasized characters and a degree of cinematic presentation that has yet to be witnessed in any Western RPG: http://zoome.jp/violet/diary/184
  
  Check out the in-game opening cinematic, or the TGS 2009 US Trailer. Those videos appear to tell more of an story in a few minutes than say, Dragon Age or Fallout do in hours, not counting the Codex entries and other pre-existing lore.

You really cannot hate games like Final Fantasy while preferring Dragon Age over Fallout 3 for the same reasons.



Very few stories get the balance JUST RIGHT: Planescape: Torment

If Dragon Age was made in the Fallout 3 engine, or if an FO3-like game had the character/party interplay of a BioWare product, together with the cinematic flair of a Final Fantasy, this Universe would explode in a supernova of Awesomeness. <3



In closing, anyone who takes up a campaign of hate for anything most likely has issues from beyond the product itself. 

Modifié par SleeplessInSigil, 29 janvier 2010 - 03:31 .

[Bryy_Miller]

herwin1 wrote...

Fallout 3 is Oblivion in the DC area.

Oh no you didn't.

[SleeplessInSigil]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

herwin1 wrote...

Fallout 3 is Oblivion in the DC area.

Oh no you didn't.

You mean Dragon Age is LoTR in Thedas?

[LyonVanguard]

Lol, I bought Oblvion after buying fallout 3 and I felt the same way. Couldn't play it.

[Bryy_Miller]

I reinstalled Oblivion a few weeks ago. It was horrible.

[Evil Tigz]

I find this thread interesting as someone who's been playing RPG's since the dawn of the dinosaur. I won't go into the whole Oblivion/DA:O bash though as they are totally 2 different types of gaming experience. I have played morrowind and as much I liked the distraction it just felt there was something missing, but it still a good game in its own right. Oblivion from what I been hearing and seen, is more of a sandbox game where the player can do what they want and when they want, however the main problem with these types of games is sometimes they can feel without direction or dull. Thats not to say Obivilon is a bad game, it just means how the game was paced is different from DA:O.



DA:O does feel a bit linear in places but, as a result the player can work their way through the story pretty quick with a sense of achievement. To me this is very much like the Old School RPGs and it does feel you are part of a good book, or story when you play. I think the main issue is that theres been a distinct lack of story driven RPG's for a while now, and so spite its flaws we welcomed DA:O with open arms. That does not mean Oblivion is a bad game, it just means its a game that has a different way of relating its story and world. I still love fall out, Vampire Maraquade, and much older games like robinsons requiem. (I WILL be suprised if any one knows that one , but a free nug and cookies to those who do). I do say though that Dragon Age has filled that fantasy fetish for dressing as a well armed female elf and squishing things between my well ample weapons fix very nicely.



So seriously folks don't be hating someone simply because they have different preferences to their gaming experience. Just throw a inflamed nug at them whilst yelling DIE DARKSPAWN FOR KILLIN MA PA!!... I do love DA:O but I also love fall out games as well, for what they are.

[SleeplessInSigil]

Evil Tigz wrote...

robinsons requiem.

+1

Did not Google or anything, and I did not play more than a couple hours of it, more than probably a decade ago, but I instantly recalled it.  


you woke up in a valley or something, right?

Modifié par SleeplessInSigil, 29 janvier 2010 - 05:44 .