391 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

They would have also needed to force the warden back to camp at regular intervals. IIRC, you could pretty much play the entire game without ever going to camp.

How do you figure that? If I'm not voluntarily going to the camp, then I'm not interested in the camp content. What interest is served by forcing me to the camp?

Anyway, we should probably drop DA's approach as long as we're on this board. There is going to be a ship, and we'll be returning to it often.

Also, DA:O allowed you to have those conversations pretty much anywhere, not just in camp.In DA2 and all of the MEs, you needed to visit companions at their locations to have those conversations with them. It was fairly easy to make the rounds in ME1, only one short elevator ride to catch everybody. DA2, ME2, ME3 you did a lot of traveling and sat through load screens to access them, though you were usually advised when new conversations were available. Really organic.Being able to have all (or most) of the conversations in one visit would have saved me a lot of wasted time.

Hmm. What system were you playing on? I get the impression your loadscreens were a lot more punishing than mine. I'll gladly take a second of loadscreen over measuring out the content for myself, which is also not organic.

I don't think we can get to organic. I'll settle for a system I don't have to think about.

[RoboticWater]

Multiplayer will never satisfy me.  I will not play it.

OK. That's fine.

 

Filler content will never satisfy me.

 

 

Yeah, I have no interest in Multiplayer. If I want Multiplayer I play split-screen coop Borderlands with a friend.

 

I still don't understand why Multiplayer was implemented into the DA and ME series to begin with.

From a business perspective, MP provides customer retention, the appearance of greater value, a guarantee of internet authentication, and an easy in for microtransactions. EA have very good reasons to mandate some form of multiplayer in every one of their games. The mandate might not always produce good features (although it is in EA's best interest for the online component to have good gameplay), but MP will always be worth EA's investment. From a design perspective, MP is the perfect test for gameplay prowess. It's the perfect distillation of combat, so designers are forced to make their gameplay better from a moment to moment standpoint. And if the online component ends up being any good (like ME3MP), then that's just more fun for the player.

[AlanC9]

From a design perspective, MP is the perfect test for gameplay prowess. It's the perfect distillation of combat, so designers are forced to make their gameplay better from a moment to moment standpoint.

Note that Sylvius prefers to use pause-to-aim. MP-derived combat improvements won't be very relevant to his experience.

[Pasquale1234]

How do you figure that? If I'm not voluntarily going to the camp, then I'm not interested in the camp content. What interest is served by forcing me to the camp?

If you're going to trigger content based on the protag being somewhere, you also need to make sure the protag goes there to trigger said content. Since you could have those conversations anywhere, not just in camp, I don't know how else you'd trigger them - unless you also restricted the conversations to camp. Quest completion, perhaps? But that isn't what you suggested.

What you said was this:

If you're limiting yourself to one topic per camp visit anyway, why shouldn't the devs just implement that as the pace? If they did, would you know they had?

Hmm. What system were you playing on? I get the impression your loadscreens were a lot more punishing than mine. I'll gladly take a second of loadscreen over measuring out the content for myself, which is also not organic.

I don't think we can get to organic. I'll settle for a system I don't have to think about.

PS3 - and I'd prefer a system where I don't have to sit through load screens to talk w/ companions one companion at a time, one conversation at a time.

[RoboticWater]

Note that Sylvius prefers to use pause-to-aim. MP-derived combat improvements won't be very relevant to his experience.

I'm aware, and that's perfectly fine. However, Sylvius isn't in the target audience.

 

Luckily, the existence of multiplayer doesn't detract from singleplayer whatsoever.

[Dean_the_Young]

I think they should. Modular game development, and we buy only the parts we want.

 

Is this "I think they should" in the sense of "I think it would make business sense for them to make less or even negative profit off of me as a customer even as their costs only increase to support modularization," or is this "I think they should because I want to pay less"?

[Dean_the_Young]

Remember guys, quality over quantity. If you're going to stuff the game with filler then provide some cutscenes alongside it like Witcher 3. We don't want another DAI.

 

Why not?

 

Silly people aside, it was a successful game. Most of the enduring complaints, when the aren't nakedly hypocritical or selective, are pretty minor.

[Dean_the_Young]

Multiplayer will never satisfy me.  I will not play it.

 

How would you know that it would never satisfy you if you will not play it?

 

Perhaps you just haven't played it enough. Perhaps if you played it more past the point you give up, or play in differing ways, you'd find satisfaction.

[Pasquale1234]

Is this "I think they should" in the sense of "I think it would make business sense for them to make less or even negative profit off of me as a customer even as their costs only increase to support modularization," or is this "I think they should because I want to pay less"?

I'd guess his primary goal is to get the parts of the game he wants and avoid those he does not want, regardless of the cost to the player.

He has said in the past that he'd be willing to pay extra to remove protag VO, for example - even though having VO is a costly feature to implement.

[Dean_the_Young]

Like MP, protag VO, and any cutscene that isn't absolutely essential to the main plot?

Sign me up.

 

Unplugging an ethernet cable, a mute button, and skip buttons get you all that for free.

 

You sure you want to pay more for them to hide that stuff from you?

[Pasquale1234]

Unplugging an ethernet cable, a mute button, and skip buttons get you all that for free.
 
You sure you want to pay more for them to hide that stuff from you?

Sure, you can mute during dialogue when the protag is speaking, but you're still stuck watching them flap their mouths in silence until the cutscene is over. Muting turns off all sound, and with the amount of autodialogue in some games, you can never be sure when you'll need to mute / unmute to avoid it altogether. Some dialogues are the points where the character makes important decisions, and some of them are not skippable. Also - it's a pita.

As for MP, simply not playing it does not remove the influence on EMS caused by its existence.

[Dean_the_Young]

Sure, you can mute during dialogue when the protag is speaking, but you're still stuck watching them flap their mouths in silence until the cutscene is over. Muting turns off all sound, and with the amount of autodialogue in some games, you can never be sure when you'll need to mute / unmute to avoid it altogether. Some dialogues are the points where the character makes important decisions, and some of them are not skippable. Also - it's a pita.
 

Okay. And?

 

These aren't the sort of features that 'modularity' would address. There's nothing modular about a design decision of voiced protagonists- that's a core design consideration.

 

As for MP, simply not playing it does not remove the influence on EMS caused by its existence.

 

Actually, it does: the game was designed and intended to be balanced, number wise, around the lack of MP EMS. By all accounts, the devs didn't even realize you need MP to get the breath scene.

 

But regardless, offering to pay more to hide the feature doesn't really do you any good either.

[Pasquale1234]

Okay. And?
 
These aren't the sort of features that 'modularity' would address. There's nothing modular about a design decision of voiced protagonists- that's a core design consideration.

I know a fair bit about digital product architecture and design.

You seem to be trying to have a serious discussion about a tongue-in-cheek comment I made.
 

Actually, it does: the game was designed and intended to be balanced, number wise, around the lack of MP EMS. By all accounts, the devs didn't even realize you need MP to get the breath scene.
 
But regardless, offering to pay more to hide the feature doesn't really do you any good either.

IIRC, they reduced the EMS required for various endings when they released the EC. Prior to that, they were not all attainable without MP.

Without MP or any of the DLC, you have to complete all of the side content to get the breath scene.

If a no-MP feature would just set galactic readiness at 100%, then it could serve a purpose.

[PlatonicWaffles]

I want it to be as long as it needs to be. I repeat: I want it to be as long as it NEEDS to be.

 

I really don't want a trillion generic side quests everywhere there only to pad out the game and make it feel bigger with little effort.

[Erstus]

@RoboticWater - Good point. Multiplayer is just an aspect of gaming that does not appeal to me, personally. But as long as it does not interfere with the Single-player experience then I have no complaints

 

I definitely agree with cinematic dialogue though. I hated the Skyrim system of dialogue that DAI implemented. I also want more varied choices with following consequences then what DAI offered. Similar to what Mass Effect 1 & 2 offered.

[Sylvius the Mad]

OK. That's fine.

 

Filler content will never satisfy me.

I don't think it's filler content.  it's just content.  There's no basis for drawing a distinction between different types of content.

 

All of the content in the SP is simply "things you can do".  There's no relevant distinction beyond that.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Is this "I think they should" in the sense of "I think it would make business sense for them to make less or even negative profit off of me as a customer even as their costs only increase to support modularization," or is this "I think they should because I want to pay less"?

I'd be happy to pay more if I could get the features I want.  Game prices are far too low today, which is why they have to chase these massive audiences.

 

In 1986, I bought a game for $80 US.  The cumulative US inflation since then is about 117%, so that price in today's dollars is over $170.

 

I dislike that features I enjoy get crowded out by features I don't, so I want to create an incentive for developers to include a wider range of features.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Okay. And?

 

These aren't the sort of features that 'modularity' would address. There's nothing modular about a design decision of voiced protagonists- that's a core design consideration.

I disagree.  Muting just the protagonist and disabling subtitle would effectively restore a silent protagonist with full text dialogue.  We'd see the paraphrases, we'd choose one, and then the NPC would respond.  Dialogue would work just like DAO (and JE, KotOR, NWN, and BG).

[Sylvius the Mad]

How would you know that it would never satisfy you if you will not play it?

 

Perhaps you just haven't played it enough. Perhaps if you played it more past the point you give up, or play in differing ways, you'd find satisfaction.

I play CRPGs because I want to play alone.  If I were willing to tolerate other players, I would play tabletop RPGs.

 

Multiplayer also happens in real time, thus forcing frenetic action on the player, unlike SP which allows pausing to consider options and make decisions.

 

Furthermore, MP tends to consist almost entirely of combat, which isn't generally my favourite part of a game.  Of late, BioWare's combat has been getting less and less fun (though up to and including DAO I think they had the best combat in the industry).  Why would I want to play more of that, and in a style (real-time) that I always avoid in SP?

 

I don't play action games.  I don't play platformers.  I don't play shooters or sports games.  I don't play RTS games.  Because they're boring.

 

I play RPGs and turn-based strategy games because those are the genres that give me an experience I enjoy.  I get to sit calmly and think about what I'm going to do.  Then I get to watch the results of my choices play out.  And I get to do that constantly every step of the way through the game.

[Pasquale1234]

I disagree.  Muting just the protagonist and disabling subtitle would effectively restore a silent protagonist with full text dialogue.  We'd see the paraphrases, we'd choose one, and then the NPC would respond.  Dialogue would work just like DAO (and JE, KotOR, NWN, and BG).

I think they'd also need to adjust the way they write the protag's dialogue.

They're writing a lot of it like screenplay segments at this point, with expectations of VA and animations. Also, there's quite a bit of autodialogue included.

[Dean_the_Young]

I play CRPGs because I want to play alone.  If I were willing to tolerate other players, I would play tabletop RPGs.

 

Multiplayer also happens in real time, thus forcing frenetic action on the player, unlike SP which allows pausing to consider options and make decisions.

 

Furthermore, MP tends to consist almost entirely of combat, which isn't generally my favourite part of a game.  Of late, BioWare's combat has been getting less and less fun (though up to and including DAO I think they had the best combat in the industry).  Why would I want to play more of that, and in a style (real-time) that I always avoid in SP?

 

I don't play action games.  I don't play platformers.  I don't play shooters or sports games.  I don't play RTS games.  Because they're boring.

 

I play RPGs and turn-based strategy games because those are the genres that give me an experience I enjoy.  I get to sit calmly and think about what I'm going to do.  Then I get to watch the results of my choices play out.  And I get to do that constantly every step of the way through the game.

 

Not terribly surprised that one went over you head. Oh well.

[RoboticWater]

I don't think it's filler content.  it's just content.  There's no basis for drawing a distinction between different types of content.

 

All of the content in the SP is simply "things you can do".  There's no relevant distinction beyond that.

There is plenty of basis for drawing distinction. It might not be an exact science, but I can tell when I'm reading a pamphlet and when I'm reading a short story. The relevant distinction is what I've always said it is: artistic effort and intent.

 

I can quite clearly see the intent behind a deluge of repetitive collection quests: to pad out the game world, and I can tell when there is some clear creative initiative in quests as well.

[Maniccc]

I would deem 80-100 hours per playthrough to be the minimun acceptable for an RPG.

This just depends.  If that time is collecting junk and other brain dead activities, then no thanks.  And that's why the OP said "time sinks" specifically.  DA:I was not long because it had a lot of story, it was long because it had tons of time sinks.

[Il Divo]

I think they'd also need to adjust the way they write the protag's dialogue.

They're writing a lot of it like screenplay segments at this point, with expectations of VA and animations. Also, there's quite a bit of autodialogue included.

 

The animations ultimately are what kill that solution. If the voiced protagonist were simply a case of the protagonist standing there speaking his lines, this could work. I think this to an extent where Gaider's point comes from regarding how just muting the protagonist wouldn't solve the problem. Sure, you have a protagonist who doesn't speak now. But you also have a protagonist more actively involved in cut-scenes who is strangely muted. The cut-scene style emphasized by the voiced protagonist would draw extra attention to how strangely mute the main PC was/is. ​

[dreamgazer]

This just depends.  If that time is collecting junk and other brain dead activities, then no thanks.  And that's why the OP said "time sinks" specifically.  DA:I was not long because it had a lot of story, it was long because it had tons of time sinks.

It was long because it had plenty of story and time sinks. Eliminating the "time sinks" doesn't eliminate the other side-content that extends the narrative, to which there was plenty.