638 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

 

Hence why threads like this shouldn't exist. I hate comparing games from different developers. Apples and Oranges, people. 

rotten apple or fresh orange.......yes, you can compare apples and oranges.

[wolfsite]

rotten apple or fresh orange.......yes, you can compare apples and oranges.

If you are comparing a rotten apple to a fresh orange, you obviously have a bias against apples...... why would you though apples are awesome.

[NKnight7]

 

Hence why threads like this shouldn't exist. I hate comparing games from different developers. Apples and Oranges, people. 

 

Yep, I for one like both companies and their games just fine.

[Obliviousmiss]

rotten apple or fresh orange.......yes, you can compare apples and oranges.

 

Ok fanboy. 

 

[Linkenski]

Don't listen to any of us Bioware. You're the ones making the game and we're just a bunch of idiots! :3

 

No, I mean it... I really think the more they listen the more they shoot themselves in the foot. We just need an authentic Bioware game and anything they take from outside is gonna make it inauthentic in the end.

[Giantdeathrobot]

No.....Novigrad is actually got the best side quests, and more personal ones too for Geralt. It far from sucks. Bloody Baron gets mention because it was so damn good, this doesn't mean the other parts of the game sucked. And dare I say that a quest in Hearts of Stone trumps the Bloody Baron quest.

 

Rockstar got beat too. They cannot handle tone and mix lightheartedness and darkness as well as CD Projeckt RED. Red Dead Redemption is a huge example of this, where elements of this clash. CDPR on the other hand, knows how to mix tones together in a way that works.

 

The key to TW3's success isn't innovation, but doing things the right way and not taking short cuts. Most game developers put little effort in side content, or put so much effort in side content, the main content suffers. TW3 is one of the first to get the balance correct.

 

Yeah, we're going to disagree here. I thought TW3's tone was all over the place. It tries to shove down the whole ''oh, this world is so bleak and there are no right decisions to make!! also war is hell'' thing, but in the end you kill all the mustache-twirling villains in your way and then have Ciri save the world from the existential threat the game barely builds up thanks to The Power Of Love. Then Ciri dies if Geralt was a dick to her. Thus there's an optimal way to play the game, a ''right choice'' here. The war theme is also mostly a backdrop that you solve in a surprisingly poorly written sidequest. Radovid was one of the most disappointing NPCs I've ever seen in an RPG. Rambling Mad King cliché? Really? And Djikstra decides to go mano-a-mano against Geralt and several Special Forces soldiers? That was such a forced narrative.

 

That's not to say the game should have been The Walking Dead-level of boring grit. But for me it's hard to shallow that the game is supposed to be oh-so-more-mature-than-thou when it uses basically the same fantasy tropes we've seen a hundred times, pretty shamelessly in a few instances too.

 

I thought by contrast that Red Dead Redemption managed to keep a very consistent melancholic tone, and then capitalized with a sad but well done ending. 

 

TW3's DLCs are better. Hearts of Stone is pretty bleak, albeit not hopelessly so. And Blood and Wine is resolutely light-hearted, from what I've played of it thus far at least.

[txgoldrush]

Yep, I for one like both companies and their games just fine.

The fact of the matter however is that one game is seen as vastly superior as to set the bar in expectations of what the genre should be, the other was a flavor of the month game that is looked back less positively.

 

If you are comparing a rotten apple to a fresh orange, you obviously have a bias against apples...... why would you though apples are awesome.

No, its a bias against rottenness. Nothing should be rotten. Even if I like apples better, the orange would win.

[Linkenski]

Yeah, we're going to disagree here. I thought TW3's tone was all over the place. It tries to shove down the whole ''oh, this world is so bleak and there are no right decisions to make!! also war is hell'' thing, but in the end you kill all the mustache-twirling villains in your way and then have Ciri save the world from the existential threat the game barely builds up thanks to The Power Of Love. Then Ciri dies if Geralt was a dick to her. Thus there's an optimal way to play the game, a ''right choice'' here. The war theme is also mostly a backdrop that you solve in a surprisingly poorly written sidequest. Radovid was one of the most disappointing NPCs I've ever seen in an RPG. Rambling Mad King cliché? Really? And Djikstra decides to go mano-a-mano against Geralt and several Special Forces soldiers? That was such a forced narrative.

 

That's not to say the game should have been The Walking Dead-level of boring grit. But for me it's hard to shallow that the game is supposed to be oh-so-more-mature-than-thou when it uses basically the same fantasy tropes we've seen a hundred times, pretty shamelessly in a few instances too.

 

I thought by contrast that Red Dead Redemption managed to keep a very consistent melancholic tone, and then capitalized with a sad but well done ending. 

 

TW3's DLCs are better. Hearts of Stone is pretty bleak, albeit not hopelessly so. And Blood and Wine is resolutely light-hearted, from what I've played of it thus far at least.

With Witcher 3 it shows they had multiple writers with very different POVs and some were very soft-hearted and some weren't. The tone definitely ranges between endearing and soft-spoken to gritty and dry too much. The plot is also full of weird causality like Uma, the weirdest plot-device in the history of history. I can't help but feel they must've hired someone who were good writers but not well versed in what the Witcher had or hadn't been up to that point. Every game switched a few writers but with TW3 I felt too many major ones that made 2 good left, like Sebastian Stepien who was lead on it and left halfway into Witcher 3's development (which really shows) and another guy whose name I can't remember told me on Twitter he was heavily involved with writing the story for 2 but left the company afterwards.

 

If we're gonna talk about who handles tone well: Look at Naughty Dog. They know what the **** they're doing. Also, an extra plot for Shu Takumi, my favorite Japanese writer or Risa Suzuki. They made heavy narrative driven games for NDS and they had a mastery of tone too I felt, especially later on.

[txgoldrush]

Yeah, we're going to disagree here. I thought TW3's tone was all over the place. It tries to shove down the whole ''oh, this world is so bleak and there are no right decisions to make!! also war is hell'' thing, but in the end you kill all the mustache-twirling villains in your way and then have Ciri save the world from the existential threat the game barely builds up thanks to The Power Of Love. Then Ciri dies if Geralt was a dick to her. Thus there's an optimal way to play the game, a ''right choice'' here. The war theme is also mostly a backdrop that you solve in a surprisingly poorly written sidequest. Radovid was one of the most disappointing NPCs I've ever seen in an RPG. Rambling Mad King cliché? Really? And Djikstra decides to go mano-a-mano against Geralt and several Special Forces soldiers? That was such a forced narrative.

 

That's not to say the game should have been The Walking Dead-level of boring grit. But for me it's hard to shallow that the game is supposed to be oh-so-more-mature-than-thou when it uses basically the same fantasy tropes we've seen a hundred times, pretty shamelessly in a few instances too.

 

I thought by contrast that Red Dead Redemption managed to keep a very consistent melancholic tone, and then capitalized with a sad but well done ending. 

 

TW3's DLCs are better. Hearts of Stone is pretty bleak, albeit not hopelessly so. And Blood and Wine is resolutely light-hearted, from what I've played of it thus far at least.

I will give you Radovid....the CDPR fanbase as well doesn't really like that questline, however, it is such a small part of the story and party of the reason why that storyline falls lat is the save import, which is the only thing Bioware does better right now. The Witcher 3's tone isn't all over the place, it was established back in the novels and short stories in which CDPR continued. And TW3 continues the plot of the books, in which Eredin was part of. And Eredin wasn't all mustache twirling.

 

As for Djikstra, you forget that a peasant with a pitchfork downed Geralt.

 

 

Red Dead Redemption on the other hand is basically a world of people who are too dumb to live and Marston has to do these favors for these idiots. Thats most of the game. This is why the beginning and the end is far better than the middle. GTA IV also has a tonal clash problem.

[Linkenski]

The whole climax and epilogue of TW3 is a tonally confused mess. Dikijstra also goes bipolar and whenever you're around Triss it switches to this overly sweet lovey-dovey romance tone, as if I'm watching a romantic comedy. 

 

She's too sweet and soft in TW3. She was more of a hardass in the second game while still being girly and sexy and I liked that a lot more.

 

We suck at handling tone in the north, trust me, I'm a dane myself. We make the worst movies I have ever seen.

[Obliviousmiss]

With Witcher 3 it shows they had multiple writers with very different POVs and some were very soft-hearted and some weren't. The tone definitely ranges between endearing and soft-spoken to gritty and dry too much. The plot is also full of weird causality like Uma, the weirdest plot-device in the history of history. I can't help but feel they must've hired someone who were good writers but not well versed in what the Witcher had or hadn't been up to that point. Every game switched a few writers but with TW3 I felt too many major ones that made 2 good left, like Sebastian Stepien who was lead on it and left halfway into Witcher 3's development (which really shows) and another guy whose name I can't remember told me on Twitter he was heavily involved with writing the story for 2 but left the company afterwards.

 

If we're gonna talk about who handles tone well: Look at Naughty Dog. They know what the **** they're doing. Also, an extra plot for Shu Takumi, my favorite Japanese writer or Risa Suzuki. They made heavy narrative driven games for NDS and they had a mastery of tone too I felt, especially later on.

 

OMG UMA. Uma was a cursed hot elf. So strange. 

 

Naughty Dog is all about that tone and consistencies!!!! Uncharted 4 is a masterpiece. 

 

 

The fact of the matter however is that one game is seen as vastly superior as to set the bar in expectations of what the genre should be, the other was a flavor of the month game that is looked back less positively.

 

 

The fact of the matter is that we all have different opinions. You're not going to convert anyone to loving The Witcher 3 as much as you do, or convince people that Bioware games are supbar to it. 

[Dr. rotinaj]

The only areas where I 100% believe Witcher 3 "gained their crown" was side content and DLC. Witcher 2 had better character and plot writing but even then I don't think any of the characters in the series match up to Bioware's great characters. I like Yen and Triss but neither as much as Cassandra, I like W3's dialogue but was any of it as clever as Cole's? No. Even Corypheus, who's held up as one of Bioware's worst antagonists, is better than Eredin.

 

One thing I'll never get about the Witcher fanboys is that they have this weird double standard with the books. They'll go on and on about how awesome certain things from the books are depicted, but they're as quiet as a mouse when it comes to the problematic parts of the game i.e the last act. Ciri was never supposed to stop the white frost, Avallach was never really a good and trustworthy guy, Radovid was never batshit crazy, etc.

[Iakus]

rotten apple or fresh orange.......yes, you can compare apples and oranges.

Wow, I remember when you were Mass Effect's staunchest supporter! 

[Obliviousmiss]

Wow, I remember when you were Mass Effect's staunchest supporter! 

 

Isn't it funny how exposure to the internet completely changes tunes?

[UpUpAway]

Don't listen to any of us Bioware. You're the ones making the game and we're just a bunch of idiots! :3

 

No, I mean it... I really think the more they listen the more they shoot themselves in the foot. We just need an authentic Bioware game and anything they take from outside is gonna make it inauthentic in the end.

 

I agree, Linkenski. 

 

Bioware, please just go about finishing and polishing this game... just like you've already told us you're doing when the extension into 2017 was announced.  Take your time and don't take any abrupt left turns with it now just because of the rampant (and frequently infinitely negative) speculation that goes on here at BSN.  Just stay the course you've set for yourselves and ME:A will be a better game for it.

[Linkenski]

Uncharted 4 is a masterpiece. 

It really is.. well, not really in gameplay and encounter design, that's really ND's big weakness, but it's highly polished, chock full of attention to detail like only Rocksteady knows how to rival and it has the best and most dramaturgically sound plot with an incredible ending that I have seen in YEARS.

[dreamgazer]

And Mass Effect 2 is Bioware best game. 

 

 

THEM DADDY ISSUES, THO. 

 

THAT LAZARUS NONSENSE, THO. 

 

THAT CONTRA 3 ENDING, THO. 

[Linkenski]

 

THEM DADDY ISSUES, THO. 

 

THAT LAZARUS NONSENSE, THO. 

 

THAT CONTRA 3 ENDING, THO. 

Those were all great parts of the game, what are you talking about!?

 

I thought the game was incredibly cool.

[txgoldrush]

The only areas where I 100% believe Witcher 3 "gained their crown" was side content and DLC. Witcher 2 had better character and plot writing but even then I don't think any of the characters in the series match up to Bioware's great characters. I like Yen and Triss but neither as much as Cassandra, I like W3's dialogue but was any of it as clever as Cole's? No. Even Corypheus, who's held up as one of Bioware's worst antagonists, is better than Eredin.

 

One thing I'll never get about the Witcher fanboys is that they have this weird double standard with the books. They'll go on and on about how awesome certain things from the books are depicted, but they're as quiet as a mouse when it comes to the problematic parts of the game i.e the last act. Ciri was never supposed to stop the white frost, Avallach was never really a good and trustworthy guy, Radovid was never batshit crazy, etc.

Witcher 2's plot writing wasn't all that great and it falls completely flat in Act III in to where they had to expand on key narrative points in free DLC. Geralt regains his memories in the most contrived of manner and his development was far from great. Roche and Iorveth take control of the plot when it should be Geralt.

 

And lets go over this......The Elder Blood was supposed to stop the White Frost, and it was Ciri. Avallach is NOT all trustworthy and this was pointed out in the game. In fact, TW3 pulls a false antagonist trick with him. And Radovid showed signs of madness and a willingness to take revenge on the mages in TW1.

[dreamgazer]

Those were all great parts of the game, what are you talking about!? 

 

My dude.

 

[Giantdeathrobot]

With Witcher 3 it shows they had multiple writers with very different POVs and some were very soft-hearted and some weren't. The tone definitely ranges between endearing and soft-spoken to gritty and dry too much. The plot is also full of weird causality like Uma, the weirdest plot-device in the history of history. I can't help but feel they must've hired someone who were good writers but not well versed in what the Witcher had or hadn't been up to that point. Every game switched a few writers but with TW3 I felt too many major ones that made 2 good left, like Sebastian Stepien who was lead on it and left halfway into Witcher 3's development (which really shows) and another guy whose name I can't remember told me on Twitter he was heavily involved with writing the story for 2 but left the company afterwards.

 

If we're gonna talk about who handles tone well: Look at Naughty Dog. They know what the **** they're doing. Also, an extra plot for Shu Takumi, my favorite Japanese writer or Risa Suzuki. They made heavy narrative driven games for NDS and they had a mastery of tone too I felt, especially later on.

 

Yeah, I mean, having some humor or heartwarming moments in the story is not a bad thing at all. Indeed, I daresay it is crucial in a game that can take 100 hours to beat, this isn't a 2 hour movie, having a 100% consistent tone across the entire experience would be... well, rather monotone.

 

I can forgive sidequests taking a dip into the strange, the humorous or the tragic. But like you said, the main plotlines were obviously passed along multiple writers, some of which were aiming for a more high fantasy notes and others wanted a more low-key and cynical affair. I honestly think the ending where Ciri dies is the most fitting for the game, but to achieve it you basically need to play like Geralt barely cares about her, which makes little sense in the grand scheme of things.

 

The overabundance of magic and curses as convenient plot devices is one of my bugbears with the Witcher series, too. It always seems all too arbitrary, only there as obstacles for Geralt to solve and not much else. Dragon Age, I feel, generally does a better job of integrating magic into the world as something more than a plot device, primarily by not overusing vaguely-defined curses and focusing on the users of magic, rather than their actual powers. Also actually being able to play as a mage helps.

 

That said, I feel it's easier for Naughty Dog to achieve consistent tones and themes, since their games are linear and shorter than most RPGs. I can think of very few RPGs that have managed to maintain a properly consistent tone across the entire game, and Obsidian/Black Isle basically wrote all of them by my reckoning, albeit I admittedly do not play JRPGs.

[Obliviousmiss]

It really is.. well, not really in gameplay and encounter design, that's really ND's big weakness, but it's highly polished, chock full of attention to detail like only Rocksteady knows how to rival and it has the best and most dramaturgically sound plot with an incredible ending that I have seen in YEARS.

 

They really excel at storytelling and Character development. But I'm not going to compare it to any other game except for previous Uncharted games. 

 

Comparing Rpgs is redundant. Just like comparing MMOs is redundant. Enjoy your games! Why people so bitter? 

[dreamgazer]

Geralt regains his memories in the most contrived of manner and his development was far from great.

 

I think The Witcher 2 is pretty great, certainly much better than Witcher 3's politically-gutted, Mario-inspired plotting, but I completely agree with this.

[Cyonan]

The only areas where I 100% believe Witcher 3 "gained their crown" was side content and DLC. Witcher 2 had better character and plot writing but even then I don't think any of the characters in the series match up to Bioware's great characters. I like Yen and Triss but neither as much as Cassandra, I like W3's dialogue but was any of it as clever as Cole's? No. Even Corypheus, who's held up as one of Bioware's worst antagonists, is better than Eredin.

 

One thing I'll never get about the Witcher fanboys is that they have this weird double standard with the books. They'll go on and on about how awesome certain things from the books are depicted, but they're as quiet as a mouse when it comes to the problematic parts of the game i.e the last act. Ciri was never supposed to stop the white frost, Avallach was never really a good and trustworthy guy, Radovid was never batshit crazy, etc.

 

As much as people hate on DA:I, I maintain that companions were done very well in that game.

 

It's primarily just the side content and main villain that were a let down, so in that regard I'll agree that TW3 is the current reigning king of side content.

[txgoldrush]

Yeah, I mean, having some humor or heartwarming moments in the story is not a bad thing at all. Indeed, I daresay it is crucial in a game that can take 100 hours to beat, this isn't a 2 hour movie, having a 100% consistent tone across the entire experience would be... well, rather monotone.

 

I can forgive sidequests taking a dip into the strange, the humorous or the tragic. But like you said, the main plotlines were obviously passed along multiple writers, some of which were aiming for a more high fantasy notes and others wanted a more low-key and cynical affair. I honestly think the ending where Ciri dies is the most fitting for the game, but to achieve it you basically need to play like Geralt barely cares about her, which makes little sense in the grand scheme of things.

 

The overabundance of magic and curses as convenient plot devices is one of my bugbears with the Witcher series, too. It always seems all too arbitrary, only there as obstacles for Geralt to solve and not much else. Dragon Age, I feel, generally does a better job of integrating magic into the world as something more than a plot device, primarily by not overusing vaguely-defined curses and focusing on the users of magic, rather than their actual powers. Also actually being able to play as a mage helps.

 

That said, I feel it's easier for Naughty Dog to achieve consistent tones and themes, since their games are linear and shorter than most RPGs. I can think of very few RPGs that have managed to maintain a properly consistent tone across the entire game, and Obsidian/Black Isle basically wrote all of them by my reckoning, albeit I admittedly do not play JRPGs.

Wrong.

 

The curses in The Witcher 3 universe share a theme of wrongdoing and crimes being committed. Instead of going into the gritty detail of how these plot devices happen, WHY it happens is far more important. While the setting is a high fantasy one, in the end, TW series is low fantasy in gaming definitions. The human grounded writing is far more important than explaining the magic of the universe.