375 réponses à ce sujet

[Al Foley]

Indeed Bioware was the champion of character development and cinematics, and Fallout 4 and other games like that seem to follow Bioware's lead there. So that's why I don't understand why people are so excited to depart from that. A "successful fusion" of reduced-cinematic-style and cinematic-style is the same as "edging close to non-cinematic-style."  As I said, this is edging nearer to Bethesda which relies on ambient environment and exploration and setting to achieve an emergence of emotion and understanding of the narrative. Bethesda AKA reduced-cinematic-approach.

But as I said I don't feel BioWare is abandoning that or moving away from it, look at how complex DA Is characters were, just that the limitations in what they were trying to do and juggling all the balls they were trying to juggle watered down the end product.  Which is why Trespasser is such an amazing DLC in its own right because it proves that BioWare can literally go in any direction and still make a fun, engaging prouduct.  At least to me.  

[midnight tea]

You can't do anything for that red templar in Suledin Keep though - literally no choice can be made there. And that's what people always complain about - "player agency." With Ruck, I felt immense player agency in deciding how to break it to the mom.

 

So for you it doesn't matter if the piece of a story in the quest is well-written, or appropriate, but whether we have choice? That's no less shallow than asking for better graphics.

 

I don't necessarily require a choice - I require for the quest or story to provide me something interesting, whether a a lore piece, an emotion, sympathy, revulsion, etc. I enjoy that whether I have or don't have a choice, so long as there's a place for it in the world and story. Of course, if a game presents something interesting through the choice, or it provides an interesting flavor, I'm very glad to see it - but I don't judge the element of a story predominantly on whether I can click on a few, oftentimes very inconsequential, options.

 

Plus, you're doing something dishonest - you're comparing NPC interaction that is not a part of any quest to a small, but complete quest with a variety of choices - well then why don't you compare it to a DAI quest with a choice? Even the demon (um... Choice spirit) one right before we meet the templar - do you get yourself virgins or riches and get Michel killed and demon (um... Choice! Spirit!) lose?

 

Ruck's quest wasn't bad by any means, but it didn't rally stick out much for me, because "pick 3 ways to inform someone about someone's fate" without it going anywhere... is not going anywhere. Aside from helping to headcanon HoF character maybe.

 

In that regard Dagna's quest is much better: she goes and works towards her dream regardless of Warden's choices - and I enjoy that, because it shows that Dagna is determined either way; a character in her own right. The strength of the continuation of her story doesn't really relies on choices we make back in DAO. Yet, if you help her in DAO, she has kind words to say about HoF, which is a cool thing to see.

 

It's the little things that add to the pile. Same way, say, a full quest to turn Crossroads into a legit refugee camp gives me more, both in terms of gameplay and satisfaction. Yes, a sole quest to catch 10 ram for a hunter who says 3 lines of dialogue to me may not be that interesting, but it's part of a bigger whole - if I complete the rest of quests, convince the elven healer I meet in Redcliffe to come and help and then help her stock the herbs, I help not just ONE person, but probably hundreds of them. And if I complete a full quest I get power, influence and money out of it, directly strengthening the Inquisition and its reputation. There are actually refugees and people we can meet all over the zones who have good words to say about the organization. And we have tons of such connected or inter-connected quests in Inquisition, aside form little gestures and quests here and there.

 

So really, it is very short-sighted for you to say earlier that people who either enjoy or understand the nature of quests in DAI do it only because of "better graphic" and care about nothing else.

[robertthebard]

I'm not saying this is objective, so maybe how I phrased it is a poor choice of words. Everything I post is my opinion and I'm not claiming objective fact. I'm providing evidence of why I disagree with someone else's subjective opinion on the memorability of characters. It's difficult to make an argument, though, when listing examples and the rebuttal is just "I disagree."

 

When talking about subjective things, sometimes the only argument can be "I disagree".  The reasons have all been laid out, all that's left now is the back and forth.

Again, you're just saying that what you "paid attention to" in the game was the correct interpretation.

Actually, I paid attention to the game, for what it was.  I, and no one else that I've read short of posts like this one, am not trying to assign what you felt, what you did, nor whether you were paying attention to what was going on or not.  I stated my opinion:  The Ruck thing, not all that engaging.  The girl that has to pay the price for not keeping her pants on, not all that engaging.  I see a lot of the latter every day, hell, it took me 5 years to get on disability because of those girls that can't keep their pants on, so really, it's sort of cliché to me.

 

I know I don't appreciate being told "you just weren't paying attention" just because I disagree with what equates to engaging.  I have bent over backwards trying to demonstrate that there is no objective difference in the game between players, only subjective differences in how we as players react to it.  For that, I'm told "you're just not paying enough attention to the things I think matter", and frankly, I may not be, because those things may not matter as much to me.

[Nefla]

I mean games where I have an incharacter reason to run off and do side quests. Eg. DA2 you have to gain a ton of money, so it makes sense to be taking random jobs from anyone who offers to pay well. In Inquisition, you are trying to increase your power/influence/recruits so the various wartable quests make sense (some of the real side quests aren't as great). As opposed to trying to hook up Gheyna with her boyfriend whilst you are supposed to be stopping an advancing army. I can't stand games where you go off and frolic because it just makes me feel completely disconnected from the actual plot.

 

I actually hate exploration RPGs like Skyrim, and was really concerned when they said Dragon Age was copying that style, but it really worked for me. The way the main plot was written made me care about all those random side areas, as opposed to other games where the entire thing feels pointless. They felt alive in DA because they related to the plot, in other games they just feel dead and filled with moving mannequins to me.

 

I love both isometric games and 3D cinematic ones. Ones closer to a book, ones closer to a movie, but both books and movies can tell a great story so I'm fine with either.

Most of the wartable quests definitely make story sense and the ones that don't as much (the ones where an item is gathered or similar) it still makes sense because it's not the inquisitor doing it. My problem with the war table is that the storylines are often TOO good and make me wish I could be playing them instead of reading about them >_<

 

It's so weird to me how we can have the same opinion but about the opposite game. When playing the sidequests of DA:I I always felt like "why is this supposedly important leader putting herbs in a tree because a note told him to, or finding a lost pet or whatever? Aren't there grunts to do that? (apparently the grunts get to do all the political intrigue while the leader is picking flowers lol) Isn't there a world to save?" All the people I found out in the world just seemed like cardboard cutouts that don't move or do anything or react to a demon being 2 feet away from them. If you're lucky they have 2 sentences of dialogue where they send you to go kill ___ or collect ___ but mostly they're just statues you can't interact with. I hate that, I need interaction D: Also the things that gave you power and influence were just not believable to me. Capturing a keep makes sense, so does killing a dragon or doing something big like saving Crestwood from the undead. Things like finding a lost goat or ring though, why would that give you power or influence? I mean I could see it getting you a discount at the local shop but why would that get you an invite to the Winter Palace for example? Why would it make you powerful enough to storm Adamant? That's to say nothing of the entirely note based quests that no one is there to witness and the reward certainly isn't good enough to make an impact on the strength of your forces. I hated the power mechanic both in that it forced me to do a ton of boring tasks I would have otherwise ignored and that the things that gained you power made no sense and was pretty jarring.

 

Other than MMOs, DA:I is the only "exploration based" game that I don't like. The maps were pretty but IMO that's the only thing they had going for them. When exploring I found no one interesting to talk to, nothing fun to do, and no cool armor/weapons/whatever to find. In subsequent playthroughs I didn't unlock any of the maps that I didn't have to for the main quest or companion quests.

 

Pretty much every single zone in DA I had at least one memorable quest.  The Tomb of Fairiel for Hissing Wastes, Western Approach had the Frozen in Time Quest, Emerald Graves had finding out Fairbanks's nobility, or not, Emprise with the taking of Suledin Keep and some of the resulting stuff with their...town leader person, Crestwood had its thing with the mayor +the taking of the Keep there +the whole bit with the underwater + the Spirit of Command, Pretty much all the Exalted Plains, and Fallow Mire had the battle with the Avarr. 

For me those quests are not memorable or fun They consist mostly or entirely of combat, running to and fro and reading notes on the ground. If you're lucky you get to talk to someone briefly. I don't consider these quests horrible, they were a better than finding herbs or bear hides or what have you, but they're not something I would hold up as good. More like something I'd expect to be casually doing along the way when doing meatier sidequests in a different game.

 

 

Indeed Bioware was the champion of character development and cinematics, and Fallout 4 and other games like that seem to follow Bioware's lead there. So that's why I don't understand why people are so excited to depart from that. A "successful fusion" of reduced-cinematic-style and cinematic-style is the same as "edging close to non-cinematic-style."  As I said, this is edging nearer to Bethesda which relies on ambient environment and exploration and setting to achieve an emergence of emotion and understanding of the narrative. Bethesda AKA reduced-cinematic-approach.

BioWare seemed to attempt to be more like Bethesda with DA:I and Bethesda tried to become more like BioWare with Fallout 4 and I think both companies ignored their own strengths to make a watered down version of the other's game. I was so disappointed in both DA:I and F04 (though at least F04 had fun combat).

[vbibbi]

When talking about subjective things, sometimes the only argument can be "I disagree".  The reasons have all been laid out, all that's left now is the back and forth.

Actually, I paid attention to the game, for what it was.  I, and no one else that I've read short of posts like this one, am not trying to assign what you felt, what you did, nor whether you were paying attention to what was going on or not.  I stated my opinion:  The Ruck thing, not all that engaging.  The girl that has to pay the price for not keeping her pants on, not all that engaging.  I see a lot of the latter every day, hell, it took me 5 years to get on disability because of those girls that can't keep their pants on, so really, it's sort of cliché to me.

 

I know I don't appreciate being told "you just weren't paying attention" just because I disagree with what equates to engaging.  I have bent over backwards trying to demonstrate that there is no objective difference in the game between players, only subjective differences in how we as players react to it.  For that, I'm told "you're just not paying enough attention to the things I think matter", and frankly, I may not be, because those things may not matter as much to me.

I can't say I'm upset to disagree with someone who blames women for not being able to "keep their pants on."

[AlanC9]

Most of the wartable quests definitely make story sense and the ones that don't as much (the ones where an item is gathered or similar) it still makes sense because it's not the inquisitor doing it. My problem with the war table is that the storylines are often TOO good and make me wish I could be playing them instead of reading about them >_<

Hmm... do you'd think you'd actually be better off it the war table missions were worse?

[Nefla]

Hmm... do you'd think you'd actually be better off it the war table missions were worse?

No, I want the actual quests to be better...The interesting concepts behind the war table quests highlight the fact that the actual quests are so (IMO)uninteresting. I don't care about the war table itself one way or the other.

[vbibbi]

Hmm... do you'd think you'd actually be better off it the war table missions were worse?

It would be nice if the war table felt integrated into the rest of the game more. And that we could access it from field camps and not have to travel back to base every time to check it.

[Addictress]

So for you it doesn't matter if the piece of a story in the quest is well-written, or appropriate, but whether we have choice? That's no less shallow than asking for better graphics.

I don't necessarily require a choice - I require for the quest or story to provide me something interesting, whether a a lore piece, an emotion, sympathy, revulsion, etc. I enjoy that whether I have or don't have a choice, so long as there's a place for it in the world and story. Of course, if a game presents something interesting through the choice, or it provides an interesting flavor, I'm very glad to see it - but I don't judge the element of a story predominantly on whether I can click on a few, oftentimes very inconsequential, options.

Plus, you're doing something dishonest - you're comparing NPC interaction that is not a part of any quest to a small, but complete quest with a variety of choices - well then why don't you compare it to a DAI quest with a choice? Even the demon (um... Choice spirit) one right before we meet the templar - do you get yourself virgins or riches and get Michel killed and demon (um... Choice! Spirit!) lose?

Ruck's quest wasn't bad by any means, but it didn't rally stick out much for me, because "pick 3 ways to inform someone about someone's fate" without it going anywhere... is not going anywhere. Aside from helping to headcanon HoF character maybe.

In that regard Dagna's quest is much better: she goes and works towards her dream regardless of Warden's choices - and I enjoy that, because it shows that Dagna is determined either way; a character in her own right. The strength of the continuation of her story doesn't really relies on choices we make back in DAO. Yet, if you help her in DAO, she has kind words to say about HoF, which is a cool thing to see.

It's the little things that add to the pile. Same way, say, a full quest to turn Crossroads into a legit refugee camp gives me more, both in terms of gameplay and satisfaction. Yes, a sole quest to catch 10 ram for a hunter who says 3 lines of dialogue to me may not be that interesting, but it's part of a bigger whole - if I complete the rest of quests, convince the elven healer I meet in Redcliffe to come and help and then help her stock the herbs, I help not just ONE person, but probably hundreds of them. And if I complete a full quest I get power, influence and money out of it, directly strengthening the Inquisition and its reputation. There are actually refugees and people we can meet all over the zones who have good words to say about the organization. And we have tons of such connected or inter-connected quests in Inquisition, aside form little gestures and quests here and there.

So really, it is very short-sighted for you to say earlier that people who either enjoy or understand the nature of quests in DAI do it only because of "better graphic" and care about nothing else.

The player agency in the ruck case was an additive bonus/benefit, not something that cancels out the quality of its writing. In fact I said it was emotionally engaging, obviously from concept and writing as well.

And before people get all hyper, it's not bloody Shakespeare but I'm talking about in relation to Inquisition.

Also that model of doing a bunch of collection/busy quests is an overplayed model you see in MMO's, even if conceptually it ties to some over-arching theme of the game.

[Addictress]

I don't think I can get banned for condescending tone

[robertthebard]

I can't say I'm upset to disagree with someone who blames women for not being able to "keep their pants on."

Let me guess, you're an avid follower of "Teen Mom" on MTV?  Because these are the women I'm referring to, other than the dwarf in the quest of course.  Be that as it may, this influences whether or not I find that girl's story engaging or compelling.  Welcome to the wide world, where not everyone shares your opinions, which of course, brings us back to the actual point of the topic, yes?

[robertthebard]

The player agency in the ruck case was an additive bonus/benefit, not something that cancels out the quality of its writing. In fact I said it was emotionally engaging, obviously from concept and writing as well.

And before people get all hyper, it's not bloody Shakespeare but I'm talking about in relation to Inquisition.

Also that model of doing a bunch of collection/busy quests is an overplayed model you see in MMO's, even if conceptually it ties to some over-arching theme of the game.

 

Where is it, do you suppose, that MMOs got that concept?  I played D&D when it was pamphlets, and we had those quests.  I played Baldur's Gate, and had those quests, I played Origins, and had those quests, even in reverse.  You see, MMORPGs borrow their RPG elements from RPGs.  The quests that everyone points to and screams MMO style quest?  They were in SP games before there were MMOs.

[Addictress]

Where is it, do you suppose, that MMOs got that concept? I played D&D when it was pamphlets, and we had those quests. I played Baldur's Gate, and had those quests, I played Origins, and had those quests, even in reverse. You see, MMORPGs borrow their RPG elements from RPGs. The quests that everyone points to and screams MMO style quest? They were in SP games before there were MMOs.

Robert this is my point. This is why fans like myself love Bioware, because it wasn't just an MMO or D&D, which I totally understand is the basis/mother of RPGs. We love Bioware because it radically appended additional motion picture techniques to the RPG, additional story. Your D&D pieces don't pop out in your face with closeups about a blighted son.

[Abyss108]

Starting to think some people didn't connect to the side quests in Origins, not due to the content, but just due to a basic lack of empathy...

[robertthebard]

Robert this is my point. This is why fans like myself love Bioware, because it wasn't just an MMO or D&D, which I totally understand is the basis/mother of RPGs. We love Bioware because it radically appended additional motion picture techniques to the RPG, additional story. Your D&D pieces don't pop out in your face with closeups about a blighted son.

I'm not making the leap from what I quoted the first time to this post.  Sitting around a table with a group of friends that share the interest didn't require video, and  a good GM could paint a better picture than anything we'll get in a video game.  DA I tried to provide some of this visual stuff, and people just walked on the corpses of those people going "see, BW doesn't show us any of the darkness of this event, even though the cutscene just before you meet Leliana in the Temple zooms in on several charred and mangled corpses.  It wasn't "vivid" enough, because people have put their imaginations on hold, relying on the medium to provide them with every detail.

[AlanC9]

I don't think I can get banned for condescending tone

Since I'm still here, the evidence suggests you won't.

[robertthebard]

Starting to think some people didn't connect to the side quests in Origins, not due to the content, but just due to a basic lack of empathy...

 

You're partially correct, I have no empathy for the dwarf.  She, to turn a phrase, made her bed and now doesn't want to lie in it.  So your position is that we shouldn't consider the possibility that she knew there'd be consequences for going against her father's wishes?  Do you suppose she's the first to be told "ditch in the deep roads or you can never come home"?  She's able to sit on the street and beg, but can't find work to take of the baby herself?  It's not with her on the street, so where is it while she's out begging?  Left alone in some dark corner for rats to nibble on?

 

Allow me to use the argument put forth around side quests in DA I:  How did that quest advance your struggle with the Archdemon, or getting your treaty resolved?

[midnight tea]

The player agency in the ruck case was an additive bonus/benefit, not something that cancels out the quality of its writing. In fact I said it was emotionally engaging, obviously from concept and writing as well.

And before people get all hyper, it's not bloody Shakespeare but I'm talking about in relation to Inquisition.

Also that model of doing a bunch of collection/busy quests is an overplayed model you see in MMO's, even if conceptually it ties to some over-arching theme of the game.

 

... So the model of the quest is overplayed (the models for almost all RPG quests is overplayed, including "go talk with this NPC/go find this NPC". It's not the game mechanics that matters, but what we gain through it, in terms of story or gameplay), but the quest of "an NPC looks for lost child/spouse/friend/lover - and now it's time to deliver bad news" isn't?

 

I've seen the variation of Ruck's quest in at last 3 last RPGs I've played. It's hard to have an emotional impact when I know exactly where the story is going. "Seen this, done that".

 

It's also hard to tie oneself to an NPC I only see for 10 seconds, which is why "poor mother searching for her son" doesn't really do much for me, since I just see writers trying to pull those emotional strings. In that regard quite a few quests that pull emotional strings don't work for me at all in any game, since I know what they're trying to accomplish from storyteller's perspective.

 

I, personally, need more meat on these bones.

 

And you know what? The dying templar in Suledin Keep actually does a little something for me. He was lying there predominantly for expository reasons - to give us an insight into Imshael's methods of turning templars into lyrium abominations, alongside what we discover in the mines. But his confession about being given a choice he would simply not make? It has impact.

It not only reveals the cunning and cruelty of Imshael, but also provides some insight into the dying templar's character: he'd rather die or be turned into a monster than would consciously make a choice that could save him. He died, but in a small way he was triumphant and brought a spark of humanity into people who suffered the fate of being turned into a red templar.

 

This, Addictress, is good writing. Short and to the point, but has many layers in itself, aside from pure exposition.

[midnight tea]

Robert this is my point. This is why fans like myself love Bioware, because it wasn't just an MMO or D&D, which I totally understand is the basis/mother of RPGs. We love Bioware because it radically appended additional motion picture techniques to the RPG, additional story. Your D&D pieces don't pop out in your face with closeups about a blighted son.

 

The irony of it is that when they actually do introduce new models - like the War Table - you refuse it.

[Addictress]

I'm not making the leap from what I quoted the first time to this post.  Sitting around a table with a group of friends that share the interest didn't require video, and  a good GM could paint a better picture than anything we'll get in a video game.  DA I tried to provide some of this visual stuff, and people just walked on the corpses of those people going "see, BW doesn't show us any of the darkness of this event, even though the cutscene just before you meet Leliana in the Temple zooms in on several charred and mangled corpses.  It wasn't "vivid" enough, because people have put their imaginations on hold, relying on the medium to provide them with every detail.

Okay so now you're saying the war table harkens back to the tabletop RPG tymes?

 

*sigh* It's not. Sadly it isn't. But in any case I DO NOT discredit the glory of tabletop RPG feels. I really don't. But Bioware provides niche feels. Trademark feels. very important feels, without which Bioware no longer is Bioware.

[Abyss108]

 

You're partially remember I have no empathy for the dwarf.  She, to turn a phrase, made her bed and now doesn't want to lie in it.  So your position is that we shouldn't consider the possibility that she knew there'd be consequences for going against her father's wishes?  Do you suppose she's the first to be told "ditch in the deep roads or you can never come home"?  She's able to sit on the street and beg, but can't find work to take of the baby herself?  It's not with her on the street, so where is it while she's out begging?  Left alone in some dark corner for rats to nibble on?

 

Allow me to use the argument put forth around side quests in DA I:  How did that quest advance your struggle with the Archdemon, or getting your treaty resolved?

 

Wasn't referring to your lack of empathy for an NPC I don't even remember, was referring to the attitude you presented in your previous post towards people in real life. If that's how you feel about real people, I'm not surprised you don't suddenly gain sympathy for those in a game.

[Addictress]

The irony of it is that when they actually do introduce new models - like the War Table - you refuse it.

Okay if War Table was trying to be a tabletop RPG then I am disappointed in that also because I did not get that impression, although I concede I see why people might think it appears that way, because you are playing 3 advisors to do various tasks.

 

I seeeee. So that's what you were going for.

 

It never crossed my mind. Still, it is jarring because the whole point of an interactive computer game is to completely unwrap the tabletop RPG and make it interactive. It seems awkward and jarring to suddenly force the entire model of this game into a primordial form, if that is what it is. And for me, it didn't even give me that impression because I only had 3 choices for each mission and it's not like they had numerical stats or anything else we could modify.

[robertthebard]

 

 

 

Wasn't referring to your lack of empathy for an NPC I don't even remember, was referring to the attitude you presented in your previous post towards people in real life. If that's how you feel about real people, I'm not surprised you don't suddenly gain sympathy for those in a game.

 

I don't.  They made their choices, and it's not my problem.  The whole dwarf thing is cliché, you can see it in your day to day life, if you look around, and you can see it in books, movies and games.  So no, I don't have any empathy for "Hi, I was irresponsible, can you help me take care of my baby".

[robertthebard]

Okay if War Table was trying to be a tabletop RPG then I am disappointed in that also because I did not get that impression, although I concede I see why people might think it appears that way, because you are playing 3 advisors to do various tasks.

 

I seeeee. So that's what you were going for.

 

It never crossed my mind. Still, it is jarring because the whole point of an interactive computer game is to completely unwrap the tabletop RPG and make it interactive. It seems awkward and jarring to suddenly force the entire model of this game into a primordial form, if that is what it is. And for me, it didn't even give me that impression because I only had 3 choices for each mission and it's not like they had numerical stats or anything else we could modify.

 

It is interactive, however, since it won't start anything on it's own.  It requires your input, and while I could do most of them now w/out reading them, I couldn't when I started.

[Drakoriz]

For me DA I do a over all better job. I mean i love DA O since is was the first, but ppl always speak about decision that affect the game, but really Origin not do a better job that Inquisition on it. Most of the important decision on Origin become a A vs B situation and have 0 impact on the ending, yeah yeah HoF die or no or whoever kill the archdemon, but no meter who u recruit, u always win. There isnt a fail scenery or something that make Mage over Templar better or Werewolf over elf.