10273 réponses à ce sujet

[cachx]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
 WHY CAN'T we have more games like Heavy Rain?

I know that when you say that, you mean "story driven game" but what people hear is "game composed solely of Quick Time Events". Because the heart of every game must be the gameplay, be it shooting, jumping, exploring, managing inventories, coordinate falling block, or whatever. no matter how much you try to demean it.

As I said before, games like Heavy Rain are highly experimental, and I don't think they'll mass produce them any time soon. (I will try it as soon as I get my PS3, even when my experience with Farenheit was fairly negative).

[SkullandBonesmember]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

So Pocket, is there such a thing as too much story and/or character interaction in a game? Is having too much combat in a game ever possible?

I'd also like to extend my question to anybody willing to give their 2 cents.

[Pocketgb]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

So Pocket, is there such a thing as too much story and/or character interaction in a game? Is having too much combat in a game ever possible?

Depends on the implementation. Looking over this thread, and the forum in general, you're going to get a pretty distinct 50/50.

Do I think that ME2 put a lot of emphasis on action this time around? Not anymore than ME1 putting emphasis on the Mako portions of the game.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 06 juin 2010 - 03:53 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

cachx wrote...

I know that when you say that, you mean "story driven game" but what people hear is "game composed solely of Quick Time Events". Because the heart of every game must be the gameplay, be it shooting, jumping, exploring, managing inventories, coordinate falling block, or whatever. no matter how much you try to demean it.

As I said before, games like Heavy Rain are highly experimental, and I don't think they'll mass produce them any time soon. (I will try it as soon as I get my PS3, even when my experience with Farenheit was fairly negative).

And as I have said, there is a huge market for story driven fans. So what is wrong with developing games like that if it'll make a profit?

[bjdbwea]

Pocketgb wrote...

I classify it as a "game" if 1. it works, and 2. it makes sense. Quick-time events don't work, are lazy, and in Heavy Rain's case, completely unimmersive.

So you don't like the quick-time events in ME 2. Curious, that's one of the few things that I liked, and apart from the technical aspects the only real improvement over ME 1 in my opinion.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 06 juin 2010 - 03:55 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

Pocketgb wrote...

Depends on the implementation. Looking over this thread, and the forum in general, you're going to get a pretty distinct 50/50.

Do I think that ME2 put a lot of emphasis on action this time around? Not anymore than ME1 putting emphasis on the Mako portions of the game.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Dialogue also got streamlined in ME2, and with 10 characters compared to six, its not surprising that they would talk more, but ultimately say less.

BUT U HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT LOYALTY MISSIONS!

Yeah, that's something the shooter fans don't acknowledge. <_<

So what DL pointed out doesn't bother you?

[bjdbwea]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

So Pocket, is there such a thing as too much story and/or character interaction in a game? Is having too much combat in a game ever possible?

I'd also like to extend my question to anybody willing to give their 2 cents.

Too much story? Could be, if it's just uninteresting. Can't say I have encountered that situation any game though. If they have a boring story, it's usually not very long either.

Too much interaction? Impossible.

Too much combat? Easy, many games have it. I wouldn't yet call it too much in ME 2 though, rather too little of the other important things.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 06 juin 2010 - 04:03 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

bjdbwea wrote...

Too much combat? Easy, many games have it. I wouldn't yet call it too much in ME 2 though, rather too little of the other important things.

True enough.

[KalosCast]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

So Pocket, is there such a thing as too much story and/or character interaction in a game? Is having too much combat in a game ever possible?

I'd also like to extend my question to anybody willing to give their 2 cents.

Definite "yes" to both of them... depending on what you mean by "too much." It's all about the pacing.

A good example of a game (well, a section of a game) with far too much combat would be Orzammar in Dragon Age. You get ambushed like three differnent times in the city proper, as well as a long, long, super mega way to freakin' long push through the Deep Roads and ruins of fallen dwarven cities, to a particularly annoying boss battle and an exceptionally annoying miniboss before that. Then, you do even more fighting through even more densely packed tunnels to possibly the single most annoying boss fight in the entire game due to the ridiculous amounts of armor and very powerful mobs that the boss has at their disposal, all with only one brief, optional, and not difficult to miss breather where you get to talk to Ruck or whatever his name was. A lot of RPGs also fall into this problem towards the end of the game, Neverwinter Nights 2 was another one guilty of this.

An example of too much dialog/story would be when cut-scenes and talking break up the action far too much, and instead of combat fatigue, you get exposition fatigue. The Ur Example of this would be the Peragus Mines in Knights of the Old Republic 2. Approximately every three steps you have to listen to another holovid thing of miners whining, miners dying, or Kreia and Atton expositing information that's for the most part irrelevant to everything forever. Combine this with the fact that the combat is rather lackluster without a full party at your disposal and you have a great sequence that modders will do actually edit out of your game. Another great example (an entire-game example) would be Heavy Rain, where the dev team actually seemed to have forgotten they weren't developing for the Sega CD, and just made the equivalent of a crappy FMV game but with current-gen graphics. Except, of course, that even in the FMV era, they knew to make murder mysteries with more than one possible culprit depending on how you went about the game in order to make it actually have replay value.

Certain games can avoid this, though. First Person Shooters, for example, are hard to wear out on combat since the whole idea behind the genre is to be an unstoppable killing machine with no peripheral vision, so the violence usually doesn't even stop in cut-scenes. Meanwhile, Survival Horror, unless it's just a poorly made game, usually benefits from nearly constant atmosphere and world-building, with only very brief intermittent bits of intense combat to keep you from realizing that you're playing an adventure-puzzle game.

Overall, I feel like if you really count exposition (cut-scenes and conversations) and world-building (hub world non-combat stuff) to straight-up action in ME2, it would come out fairly close to the same ratio that there was in ME1. The problem mostly being that the shooting aspect of the game is a tad lackluster as far as tactical squad-based shooters go (it's really still just an RPG combat system with a cover mechanic and chest-high walls everywhere) so now that it has to hold up all of the game's action sequences, without explorative (or generally slower-paced combat) vehicle sections, it begins to wear out its welcome a little faster.

Modifié par KalosCast, 06 juin 2010 - 04:19 .

[KitsuneRommel]

cachx wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
 WHY CAN'T we have more games like Heavy Rain?

I know that when you say that, you mean "story driven game" but what people hear is "game composed solely of Quick Time Events". Because the heart of every game must be the gameplay, be it shooting, jumping, exploring, managing inventories, coordinate falling block, or whatever. no matter how much you try to demean it.

Space Ace

[javierabegazo]

Over the last 15 pages i've seen lots of users posting just Images followed by a sentance or two, both of which are not dealing with the Discussion Topic. This is SPAM, further Image spam will be rewarded with 24 vacations from this Forum

Only warning
(you know who you are; if this does not apply to you then disregard this message)

Thank you

Modifié par javierabegazo, 06 juin 2010 - 04:24 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

KalosCast wrote...

Definite "yes" to both of them... depending on what you mean by "too much." It's all about the pacing.

A good example of a game (well, a section of a game) with far too much combat would be Orzammar in Dragon Age. You get ambushed like three differnent times in the city proper, as well as a long, long, super mega way to freakin' long push through the Deep Roads and ruins of fallen dwarven cities, to a particularly annoying boss battle and an exceptionally annoying miniboss before that. Then, you do even more fighting through even more densely packed tunnels to possibly the single most annoying boss fight in the entire game due to the ridiculous amounts of armor and very powerful mobs that the boss has at their disposal, all with only one brief, optional, and not difficult to miss breather where you get to talk to Ruck or whatever his name was. A lot of RPGs also fall into this problem towards the end of the game, Neverwinter Nights 2 was another one guilty of this.

An example of too much dialog/story would be when cut-scenes and talking break up the action far too much, and instead of combat fatigue, you get exposition fatigue. The Ur Example of this would be the Peragus Mines in Knights of the Old Republic 2. Approximately every three steps you have to listen to another holovid thing of miners whining, miners dying, or Kreia and Atton expositing information that's for the most part irrelevant to everything forever. Combine this with the fact that the combat is rather lackluster without a full party at your disposal and you have a great sequence that modders will do actually edit out of your game. Another great example (an entire-game example) would be Heavy Rain, where the dev team actually seemed to have forgotten they weren't developing for the Sega CD, and just made the equivalent of a crappy FMV game but with current-gen graphics. Except, of course, that even in the FMV era, they knew to make murder mysteries with more than one possible culprit depending on how you went about the game in order to make it actually have replay value.

Certain games can avoid this, though. First Person Shooters, for example, are hard to wear out on combat since the whole idea behind the genre is to be an unstoppable killing machine with no peripheral vision, so the violence usually doesn't even stop in cut-scenes. Meanwhile, Survival Horror, unless it's just a poorly made game, usually benefits from nearly constant atmosphere and world-building, with only very brief intermittent bits of intense combat to keep you from realizing that you're playing an adventure-puzzle game.

Overall, I feel like if you really count exposition (cut-scenes and conversations) and world-building (hub world non-combat stuff) to straight-up action in ME2, it would come out fairly close to the same ratio that there was in ME1. The problem mostly being that the shooting aspect of the game is a tad lackluster as far as tactical squad-based shooters go (it's really still just an RPG combat system with a cover mechanic and chest-high walls everywhere) so now that it has to hold up all of the game's action sequences, without explorative (or generally slower-paced combat) vehicle sections, it begins to wear out its welcome a little faster.

Dialogue in a modern games usually isn't exposition but helps you understand the character better, especially if you as the player are free to choose various things to say to characters.

[KalosCast]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Dialogue in a modern games usually isn't exposition but helps you understand the character better, especially if you as the player are free to choose various things to say to characters.

'

Then count non-exposition conversations under "world-building" and add "character development" nitpicking aside my point still stands.

[cachx]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
So Pocket, is there such a thing as too much story and/or character interaction in a game? Is having too much combat in a game ever possible?

I'd also like to extend my question to anybody willing to give their 2 cents.

Too much of anything can get overbearing. That's why high action games like Devil May Cry or God of war only last 6 - 8 hours.

Recent examples, from the top of my head...
I love Dragon Age, but the battles at the Deep Roads were absurdly long, felt like they were streching it just for padding.

In terms of story, mmm... the intro level of Kingdom Hearts 2, not only because the history itself was nonsense, but they unnesesarily drill you with it for 2 damn hours.

At least both ME1 and 2 had good pacing, with conversation and story bits at the beggining, middle and end of every mission.

bjdbwea wrote...
So you don't like the quick-time events in
ME 2. Curious, that's one of the few things that I liked, and apart from
the technical aspects the only real improvement over ME 1 in my
opinion.

Seems you confuse ME2's "kindly press here to see something cool" with "PRESS X NOT TO DIE !!" present in games like God of War or Residen Evil 4, most gamers I know and a lot of critics hate that.

[KalosCast]

cachx wrote...
Seems you confuse ME2's "kindly press here to see something cool" with "PRESS X NOT TO DIE !!" present in games like God of War or Residen Evil 4, most gamers I know and a lot of critics hate that.

Though Resident Evil 4 stands as a pretty good example on how QTE's aren't always evil. Especially the situational combat ones. The knife fight with Krauser also still stands as one of my favorite game sequences. They're kind of like clear Deus Ex Machina scenes, it's not a bad trope, it's just one that appears much more often in bad productions than good ones.

ME2's interrupts is another example of good implementation. Utilizing them can give you an actual edge when gameplay returns, and if it doesn't, you usually get a decent-sized alignment bonus.

Modifié par KalosCast, 06 juin 2010 - 04:37 .

[bjdbwea]

KalosCast wrote...

A good example of a game (well, a section of a game) with far too much combat would be Orzammar in Dragon Age.

I never got this dislike of Orzammar. I think it only portrays the Deep Roads realistically. It's not "immediate", and yes you have to walk your way through it instead of being dropped right into the action and then beamed back to a "mission completed" screen, but that is exactly one of the reasons I like it. Would have been better with more challenging combat, but at least it's more interesting than pew-pew. It seems many people prefer the combat in their games to look cool rather than be a challenge, but I definitely prefer the latter. Not that the combat in DA would look uncool.

You also overlooked that there are several other story/dialogue interludes throughout the Deep Roads, among them comments by your companions, which by the way is another thing very much missing in ME 2.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 06 juin 2010 - 04:37 .

[KalosCast]

bjdbwea wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

A good example of a game (well, a section of a game) with far too much combat would be Orzammar in Dragon Age.

I never got this dislike of Orzammar. I think it only portrays the Deep Roads realistically. It's not "immediate", and yes you have to walk your way through it instead of being dropped right into the action and then beamed back to a "mission completed" screen, but that is exactly one of the reasons I like it. Would have been better with more challenging combat, but at least it's more interesting than pew-pew. It seems many people prefer the combat in their games to look cool rather than be a challenge, but I definitely prefer the latter. Not that the combat in DA would look uncool.

You also overlooked that there are several other story/dialogue interludes throughout the Deep Roads, among them comments by your companions, which by the way is another thing very much missing in ME 2.

So being embroiled in combat pretty much the moment you show up, and then going straight back to the safe hub after you kill the boss and do your little dance with the anvil isn't "being dropped right into the action and then beamed back to a "mission completed" screen" could've fooled me.

Comments made by your companions aren't action breaks, and can easily be lost in the jumble of setpiece noise. As far as I remember, the only breather moments were talking to ruck and talking to the creepy poem girl right before the BroodMother, and even then there was combat right up until you got to them, and combat right after you got to them. Other than that all you got was Velma the Dwarf saying "jinkies gang, I found another clue!" every time you trekked through another area.

[SkullandBonesmember]

KalosCast wrote...

breather moments

Ironic that you mention breathers when you're fine with the pacing of ME2.

[bjdbwea]

KalosCast wrote...

So being embroiled in combat pretty much the moment you show up, and then going straight back to the safe hub after you kill the boss and do your little dance with the anvil isn't "being dropped right into the action and then beamed back to a "mission completed" screen" could've fooled me.

No, it isn't. The game drops you nowhere. You decide where you go, you decide when to enter the Deep Roads, you decide when you want to leave again, maybe take a break and do something else. And in the end you can choose to be conveniently transported back, but you can also stay there and continue to explore. It's called freedom. That's exactly how it's supposed to be in an RPG, and nothing less could have been expected from ME 2 too.

By the way, there's also comments from Oghren, as well as several side missions or secrets. But of course that area is combat heavy - it's the Deep Roads! But this is not about DA, it's about ME 2. So let's not discuss our opinions about DA in detail, but concentrate on ME 2.

[KalosCast]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

breather moments

Ironic that you mention breathers when you're fine with the pacing of ME2.

I feel like it has plenty of breather moments, and in fact I mentioned exactly that I understand why you'd find the action sequences (since they're all infantry battles) but please, by all means continue to nitpick at things tangentially related to my points.

[cachx]

bjdbwea wrote...
"mission completed" screen,

Never quite got why the hate is for the Mission Complete screen. How is it detailed information of money received, power unlocked and resources gained harmful in any way? (and please don't argue immersion nonsense).

[KalosCast]

bjdbwea wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

So being embroiled in combat pretty much the moment you show up, and then going straight back to the safe hub after you kill the boss and do your little dance with the anvil isn't "being dropped right into the action and then beamed back to a "mission completed" screen" could've fooled me.

No, it isn't. The game drops you nowhere. You decide where you go, you decide when to enter the Deep Roads, you decide when you want to leave again, maybe take a break and do something else. And in the end you can choose to be conveniently transported back, but you can also stay there and continue to explore. It's called freedom. That's exactly how it's supposed to be in an RPG, and nothing less could have been expected from ME 2 too.

By the way, there's also comments from Oghren, as well as several side missions or secrets. But of course that area is combat heavy - it's the Deep Roads! But this is not about DA, it's about ME 2. So let's not discuss our opinions about DA in detail, but concentrate on ME 2.

Well, except for the part where you literally get attacked the moment you show up, unless you decide to ditch Orzammar to go somewhere else, there's a specific place and time that you can enter the Deep Roads, where you can't go in before that bit of plot happens, and you can't advance anything in the city until after you beat the Deep Roads portion. Sure, fine, you can go shopping whenever you want throughout that whole bit but it doesn't really count.

But to try to tie it in, it's portions like the deep roads that makes me able to understand where people are coming from in ME2. I don't think the problem actually is the story to action ratio, as much as it's simply the fact that there's a whole ton of action  that's all presented in only the same way (battling small groups of Darkspawn/Blue Suns over a larger cavern/complex to give the impression that you're fighting an army/army). Though I still feel like ME2's is properly broken up. Theoretically, one who didn't enjoy shooter-based combat could simply play on Casual where everything is scaled down to the point where all you have to do is saunter forward and occaisonally glare at a Vorcha until he bursts into flame.

cachx wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...
"mission
completed" screen,

Never quite got why the hate is for the Mission Complete screen. How is it detailed information of money received, power unlocked and resources gained harmful in any way? (and please don't argue immersion nonsense).

I would actually argue for it in the case of Immersion, since Cerberus is funding this project with TIM being personally involved, somoene is probably filing reports to send back to the chain-smoking cyborg and this someone is either you or is giving them to you to read before they're sent out.

Modifié par KalosCast, 06 juin 2010 - 05:03 .

[KalosCast]

worm_burner wrote...

ME2 they main story was almost non-existent. There were a few main plot missions split up by loyalty missions. For me, not sure why, but the story missions just didnt seem to live up to the ones in the previous game. I mean nothing compared to the Virmire and Ilos missions (and their cut scenes).

Virmire, while cool looking with cool speeches had that mind-bendingly stupid bit where you had to kill one of your squad-mates because the game didn't let you remember the fact that you had at least two squadmates and several marines on board your ship to help defend Ash/Kaiden while you saved Kaiden/Ash