317 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

I always feel so sad for Kelder despite what he has done because he is so clearly a man who is mentally ill in a time where mental illness is not recognised the same as it is now and he seems to have had no chance of obtaining the help he desperately needs. 

 

It does not change what he has done but it does make the whole affair all the more tragic, in my opinion. It also adds this subtle tone of horror to the setting of how people with psychological conditions such as intrusive thoughts very likely fear that they are being influenced by a demon and what they might do to themselves if they worry they might be compelled to carry out their thoughts by the demon.     

 

A small correction note of correction: I believe all companions consider killing Kelder to be the best course of action and they all approve of it.
 

 

I sort of wish we could go after the Magistrate. He's the real villain of that story. 

[Lucca_de_Neon]

I hope there ISN'T a measure of friendship or rivalry in ME. Leave that for DA and so on. ME doesn't need it.

[KaiserShep]

I hope there ISN'T a measure of friendship or rivalry in ME. Leave that for DA and so on. ME doesn't need it.

 

I dunno. I think it makes the companions more fun. Over time, I've become spoiled by the DA side, because there's actual variety in the way companions interact with the PC. In ME, they're all friendly to Shepard no matter what. I'd love to see a version of Garrus, or Liara or Tali that actually dislikes Shepard. 

[Lucca_de_Neon]

I dunno. I think it makes the companions more fun. Over time, I've become spoiled by the DA side, because there's actual variety in the way companions interact with the PC. In ME, they're all friendly to Shepard no matter what. I'd love to see a version of Garrus, or Liara or Tali that actually dislikes Shepard. 

Well, there are cases. For example, if you are too renegade, Liara mentions in the recording that she does in ME3 that you two don't always see eye to eye, even if you are in a relationship with her. My point is that i don't want my companions to leave me because i go too renegade or too paragon. It's futuristic war instead of sort of medieval, there was always that understanding of "we fight together or we die" and i don't want to see it end just because i hurt someone's feelings

[AlanC9]

Some serious mental gymnastic here. All there is to say is that most of the industry recognized the contribution CDPR has made in the C&C dept ever since the first Witcher came out. That is to say, they do it with moral ambiguity and time delayed consequences. This does not characterize the thrust of RPG design by Bioware, which centers around chosen hero cliches and power trips. Sure, some of the decisions in their games are nuanced - especially in DA:O - but most are plain old black and white and meant to stroke the player's ego. Both approaches are valid, but don't go pretending Bioware paved the way in this regard. They most certainly have not.

This isn't really an argument, though. It's just a restatement of the conventional wisdom.

[wolfhowwl]

I dunno. I think it makes the companions more fun. Over time, I've become spoiled by the DA side, because there's actual variety in the way companions interact with the PC. In ME, they're all friendly to Shepard no matter what. I'd love to see a version of Garrus, or Liara or Tali that actually dislikes Shepard. 

 

That would be nice but I hope they wouldn't include DA's "X slightly approves" notifications.

[Lady Artifice]

cause the games overall aren't usually very grimdark

 

Agreed, but low grimdark quotient sometimes leads to what I consider to be hyperbolic accusations of extreme sanitization. 

[Steelcan]

Agreed, but low grimdark quotient sometimes leads to what I consider to be hyperbolic accusations of extreme sanitization. 

hey if it was up to me DA would be a lot more, well Medieval

[Lady Artifice]

Some serious mental gymnastic here.  

 

I'm sorry that you think so. I was of course, going for logic of the non gymnastic variety. 

 

 

 

All there is to say is that most of the industry recognized the contribution CDPR has made in the C&C dept ever since the first Witcher came out. That is to say, they do it with moral ambiguity and time delayed consequences. This does not characterize the thrust of RPG design by Bioware, which centers around chosen hero cliches and power trips. Sure, some of the decisions in their games are nuanced - especially in DA:O - but most are plain old black and white and meant to stroke the player's ego. Both approaches are valid, but don't go pretending Bioware paved the way in this regard. They most certainly have not.

 

I'm going to be very careful here, and very clear that the comparisons I'm making are not a slight on the Witcher franchise, the writing of which I mostly admire. They are also not a claim that the Witcher is in any an imitation of anything Bioware has done. 

 

The absolutely verifiable fact that I am stating, is that the specific example given from the Witcher 3, of a character being spared/saved leading to specific negative consequences within the story world, can not only be found in previous Bioware games, but it can found numerous times. 

[KaiserShep]

Well, there are cases. For example, if you are too renegade, Liara mentions in the recording that she does in ME3 that you two don't always see eye to eye, even if you are in a relationship with her. My point is that i don't want my companions to leave me because i go too renegade or too paragon. It's futuristic war instead of sort of medieval, there was always that understanding of "we fight together or we die" and i don't want to see it end just because i hurt someone's feelings

 

Eh, that bit with Liara didn't really gel with me, because even a Shepard that leans more renegade can still pretty much make every decision that she'd agree with, like saving the rachni queen and the Council. As for companions potentially leaving, that's not really a necessity in an approval system. It can change their disposition, but that doesn't require that it come to the point where they outright abandon ship or something, though it could make sense in some cases, especially if there are elements of the crew that are ragtag and "unofficial", sort of like parts of ME2's crew, Jack in particular. 

[Battlebloodmage]

A lot of Fallout 4 dark stories are happening in the background. It's pretty dark as well. There is a part where you mistake Norwegian people stuck onshore at the Commonwealth defending themselves for raiders because they speak a different language, and they just shoot people come close to the ship because they want to avoid raiders, and the people around them can't understand them so there is a mutual distrust. A lot of what they say being translated showing that they're not bad people, and if you kill them, they say that they're finally coming home. You're basically slaughtering a bunch of self defense people who just want to be left in peace just because you happen to stumbling upon the place. In term of role playing, you have no choice but to shoot back because you can't understand them, and you're also defending yourselves. It's a miscommunication leading to self defense on both sides. You're basically as a player, unknowingly becoming a bad guy invading into other people's safe territory. People like to knock on FO4 stories for being an open world game, but it can get pretty complex, and a lot of them times, there are no right answer because even the selfish decisions could be seen as necessary or sacrifice a few to benefit the many. Sparing people could end up biting you in the back.There are suicides, people eating their own families to survive. It gets pretty gritty if you pay attention to all the stories going on in the background. If ME or DA wants to show the brutality of war, they need to show more of why it's bad and how it's affecting everyone. There are a few moments, but it's not that many and a lot can be missed. In the next game, as an explorer, I don't think dark theme is necessary, they could show a hopeful side of it. In DAI, I barely care about mages and templars in DAI because they all come off as a bunch of lunatics attacking each other. There are some said stories you can discover but it's barely there. 

[Lady Artifice]

hey if it was up to me DA would be a lot more, well Medieval

 

I know.

 

And I still think it's a little more fun that it's not. 

[Battlebloodmage]

I know.

 

And I still think it's a little more fun that it's not. 

I think what could make DAI be more medieval would be to have a darker color scheme. I think it's too colorful.

 

Fallout 4 is intentionally have a gray color scheme to show the grayness of morality, which is the direction of the game.

 

It's like with Man of Steel. They change the color grading to make it more darker, one of which showing Superman killing people.

 

 

Depending on the direction, the background and atmosphere could really set up the pace for the game.

[AlanC9]

It's an interesting idea. Remember, DA:O got a lot of grief for its drab color scheme. DA2 was brighter, but still working from a limited palette.

[SardaukarElite]

I think what could make DAI be more medieval would be to have a darker color scheme. I think it's too colorful.

 

Fallout 4 is intentionally have a gray color scheme to show the grayness of morality, which is the direction of the game.

 

It's like with Man of Steel. They change the color grading to make it more darker, one of which showing Superman killing people.

 

Only Man of Steel was terrible and Fallout 4 has the moral depth of an empty bathing pool.

 

Color still existed in the Middle Ages, people - despite existing in what was probably a pretty terrible time to be alive - would have tried to be happy, tried to be colorful. Use that color for contrast and juxtaposition, rather than washing it out to sledgehammer an obvious point. 

[Liamv2]

Color still existed in the Middle Ages, people - despite existing in what was probably a pretty terrible time to be alive - would have tried to be happy, tried to be colorful. Use that color for contrast and juxtaposition, rather than washing it out to sledgehammer an obvious point. 

 

Exactly this. You can have a medieval setting without looking like everything is viewed through a coffee filter. You also don't have to be bright and cartoonish either ala fable.

[Battlebloodmage]

It's an interesting idea. Remember, DA:O got a lot of grief for its drab color scheme. DA2 was brighter, but still working from a limited palette.

I remember when Diablo 3 has a lot of complain about how brightly the game is when it used to be gothic and dark. It's just depending on how they use it to set the mood, while it's just a background thing, it can create a contrast between the game and the atmosphere. There would be a disconnection if there are killing everywhere, and you see everything in brightly colors like it's happy and festive. DAI seems to be a bit too bright. ME3 employs a more blueish color scheme, it's more calming. Color can evolve emotions in people. It doesn't have to be dark and everything, but it shouldn't be too bright either. It's really depending on how the setting is and what the location is and what kind of emotions you want from people.

[Seraphim24]

As long as you guys mean "AAA" industry when you refer to gaming industry, these discussions on choice and consequence are fairly accurate.

 

For example, I remember one benchmark for CnC was the 1995 Playstation port of Tactics Ogre: Let Us Cling Together, which (spoiler) was a game inspired by the "ethnic cleansing" in Serbia, and where you could genocide a town in order to artificially create a basis for war for a cause that was like "theoretically" in the right but would never win without something like that to support them. A game which predates Bioware's entire existence, and which is actually based off an earlier iteration of the same ideas apparently in Ogre Battle: March of the Black Queen.

 

Spoiler

 

Although yeesh I voted no to that, which of course makes Vice your enemy no matter what you choose and ultimately he was hanged and er yeah that was quite a game.

 

You could do other things like after your sister acceded to the throne, kill her in battle in order to have yourself accede right after and obtain the all powerful "Lord" class.

 

Moreover, categorizing Bioware as a CnC company is a bit well.. I mean their early games were like Shattered Steel and MDK2 which were just mech and space sim fighters, I'd view their "Moral dilemma" thingy as more an outgrowth of licensing and making D&D games and the tabletop systems, which had a Law/Chaos Good/Evil alignment system built into the game, and which in turn was partially based on Moorcock's Law/Chaos concepts in the Stormbringer series.

 

I think actually Bioware games just tend to be more honest about the fact that they have a bias in the CnC process, which I mean, wasn't at all obvious when Flaming Fist mercenaries would gang up on you and every important NPC for power upgrades (Dwarven smith in BG2, etc) was good aligned.

 

Once they moved away from straight 2e D&D and 3e D&D stuff with KOTOR, JE, ME, and DA it was all kinda the dialogue wheel or some kind of dark/light system which was vaguely tinted with moral CnC but was more of an on-rails kind of experience. The popcorn version, if you will.

 

Likewise, I think TW series, while clearly evincing a preference for making compelling CnCs, is also descending from just kind of the generically grimdark antiheroic ethos of TW books, which, despite not being interactive, tend to involve morally gray actions and consequences.