Fimbulvetr
Member
Nirolak said:
That is interesting.
When you think about those details, Dragon Age 2 sounds like a failed Tales game. Man that felt weird to say.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Laidlaw: Dragon Age IIs weaknesses must be improved
- Thread starter subversus
- Start date
That is interesting.
When you think about those details, Dragon Age 2 sounds like a failed Tales game. Man that felt weird to say.
Fimbulvetr said:
You meant gunplay. But yes, it was one of their worst systems.
Hire right people
TW2 allowed more choices - being agressive, being persuasive, using axii sign or bribe. There was no paragon or renegade scale. Still it wasn't a central point just an addition, they could expand on that, make it more complex. And yes, this system should be as restrictive as any basic stats-based system where you put your points manually and if you want to succeed you should fill only ONE bar.
Also ME2 persuasion wasn't horrid. I was never able to max out my renegade scale because my character started looking too ugly and I wasn't in the mood to grind for Med-Bay. Also some choices had some real "asshole" feel to them, I find myself reloading because I didn't want to loathe my character. What they forgot to add is some system to counter paragon path. Like if you had too many paragon points you'll encounter much more problems along the way as people know that you're stupid Goody Two Shoes.
GreenMonkey
Member
Chairman Yang said:
Bingo.
There's still plenty of us out there. BG2 continues to be a best seller at GOG. DA:O sales were good.
Instead, they just screw it up by trying to un-western-RPG-ofy their games instead, in hopes of being a big seller on a console.
It doesn't have to be huge budget. A good western-style RPG would still sell - just like DA:O did - even on a tighter budget / less snazzy graphics.
Fimbulvetr
Member
No, I meant what I said.subversus said:
It really is.subversus said:
The game basically provides you with a win button with the prerequisite that you decide to mostly be an asshole or mostly be a saint. And honestly there's rarely a difference between the two. At best Renegade gets paid slightly more and Paragon doesn't kill unimportant side-characters that you will immediately forget anyway. I guess there was also that one event during Samara's Loyalty Mission, where the Renegade choice is the stupidest thing any sapient being could possibly do.
Hell I've filled up a good 1/4th or 1/3rd of the Renegade meter and still managed to max out the Paragon meter, so the game still lets me break character and win anyway.
VisanidethDM
Banned
In my eyes, the best plan for Bioware would be, like Nirolak said, find something to focus on.
My advice to them is:
1) Guys, you're absolutely terrible at creating RPG system. Like, horrible. But you did good with D&D. Go back to D&D. They'll make the rules for you. You literally only have to translate them in code, and make them balanced in videogame terms, and you've proved in the past you CAN do it.
2) Change your inspirations. No, it's not God of War. It's Tactics Ogre. If you're using D&D, D&D post 3rd edition (and much more in 4th ed, which is incredibly apt to be translated in videogame form) has been grid based since the beginning. Go full turn based, scrap the stupid pause and play mechanics, work on a western strategy RPG model. You're the only guys in the market doing party based RPGs. We buy shit like DA:O because of that. We'll buy turn based games too.
3) Tactics Ogre/FFT would also serve as the inspiration for something else that would be pretty cool: let us make our characters. MULTIPLE ones. Sure, throw in the interesting "pre gen" characters with a role in the story, and give em unique skills, but let us create at least half of our party. Use the D&D toolset, let us play with it.
And really, that's that. Just make a digital version of D&D. Persuade WotC. It's all there. Imagine being able to put in the 800-1000ish pages of 4th edition player manuals as character options. Something like 20 balanced classes already made for you. You have monsters manuals to inspire from, awesome artists to contact for concept art. You've got nothing else to do than write a story. It's so fucking simple, and it would be a glorious thing. It will sell. I promise you.
My advice to them is:
1) Guys, you're absolutely terrible at creating RPG system. Like, horrible. But you did good with D&D. Go back to D&D. They'll make the rules for you. You literally only have to translate them in code, and make them balanced in videogame terms, and you've proved in the past you CAN do it.
2) Change your inspirations. No, it's not God of War. It's Tactics Ogre. If you're using D&D, D&D post 3rd edition (and much more in 4th ed, which is incredibly apt to be translated in videogame form) has been grid based since the beginning. Go full turn based, scrap the stupid pause and play mechanics, work on a western strategy RPG model. You're the only guys in the market doing party based RPGs. We buy shit like DA:O because of that. We'll buy turn based games too.
3) Tactics Ogre/FFT would also serve as the inspiration for something else that would be pretty cool: let us make our characters. MULTIPLE ones. Sure, throw in the interesting "pre gen" characters with a role in the story, and give em unique skills, but let us create at least half of our party. Use the D&D toolset, let us play with it.
And really, that's that. Just make a digital version of D&D. Persuade WotC. It's all there. Imagine being able to put in the 800-1000ish pages of 4th edition player manuals as character options. Something like 20 balanced classes already made for you. You have monsters manuals to inspire from, awesome artists to contact for concept art. You've got nothing else to do than write a story. It's so fucking simple, and it would be a glorious thing. It will sell. I promise you.
Fimbulvetr said:
I thought powers were cool.
Every stat check is a win button. Also for me the difference isn't in an outcome only but what is the nature of my choice (being asshole for example) is and what this choice does to me as a character (makes me uglier in the said case).
If we talk about how dialogue choices had gameplay consequences in ME2 then yeah, they pretty much failed at that, but that's not a failure of the system but a failure of design. As far as I know you could lose loyalty of some party members thus making them more likely to die in the final mission, but they could make it much deeper than that.
Also, while this is technically a Mass Effect video, the first video is a 10 minute, detailed description of how BioWare catalogs and responds to community feedback: http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featu...on-interview-mass-effect-s-feedback-loop.aspx
This method is also used by the Dragon Age team, so I thought it might be an interesting addition to the discussion.
I have to head out for a few hours unfortunately, but I'll be back later.
This method is also used by the Dragon Age team, so I thought it might be an interesting addition to the discussion.
I have to head out for a few hours unfortunately, but I'll be back later.
VisanidethDM
Banned
HK-47 said:
Forgotten Realms were boring in all editions. This is Bioware's chance to try something new. I don't dare say Planescape, but Dark Sun, Greyhawk, Dragonlance would work. A setting unreleased in 4E like the last 2 could be perfect, leaving them all design freedom they need. Or even Eberron. Eberron has the potential of being somewhat unique.
AlimNassor
Banned
Bioware has fallen hard. After ME3 I'm done. I still love the Mass Effect series :/ and still think ME2 was great but man it was disappointing.
DA:O was just okay, nothing like KOTOR which I loved. DA2 was bad, I enjoyed it the first time, but the second, i gave up.
DA:O was just okay, nothing like KOTOR which I loved. DA2 was bad, I enjoyed it the first time, but the second, i gave up.
Spat_triate
Member
Ah the Molineaux model:
2010 PR: DA2 is the best thing since sliced bread!
2011 PR: You spent $60 on that shite? DA3 is the best thing since peanut butter cups!
etc.
etc.
Ad infinitum.
2010 PR: DA2 is the best thing since sliced bread!
2011 PR: You spent $60 on that shite? DA3 is the best thing since peanut butter cups!
etc.
etc.
Ad infinitum.
VisanidethDM
Banned
Patryn said:
EA could bruteforce it, if they wanted to.
Riposte
Member
Nirolak said:
I am remember reading a blog of a bioware designer(or director?) who recently left Bioware. The impression I got was that he didn't quite like the direction it was going in. Maybe it was a fever dream...
EDIT: I find it fucking hilarious that DDO takes place in Eberron, but you don't even get to visit Sharn. Crazy!
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Wait, do they actually continually refer to you as "champion" in game?Fimbulvetr said:
Christ BioWare likes stroking their player's egos, don't they. Its like the recurring theme of their games, "you are now a completely awesome person straight from the start of the game! "
Fimbulvetr
Member
VisanidethDM said:
At first I was gonna object a bit(even though TO and FF:T are both amazing), but then I realized something like that would totally fit within the context of DA2's ending.
The_Technomancer said:
It's okay though, since you don't join a special group.
VisanidethDM
Banned
The_Technomancer said:
It's not that. It actually started as a gameplay mechanic: Bioware needed to face the conundrum of having a character the player was creating addressed by NPC both in dialogue and voiced dialogue. So they invented the "title" mechanic you see happening in all their games (the Warden, the Specter, the Champion, the Harper etc) - it gives your character a "name" writers and voice actors can use.
In DA2, you become "the Champion" in the last third of the game, and it's not pushed around much. It's nowhere near as annoying or offensive as the Warden title, which was one colossal player masturbation mechanic. Also, while in DA:O you were given power of life or death over kings simply because you were made Warden and some witch saved you, Hawke gets his Champion title for a reason.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Hm, okay, I'll buy that.VisanidethDM said:
VisanidethDM
Banned
The_Technomancer said:
It's one of the things I appreciated as a non-Bioware fan. The "you've joined this superorganization and achieved god-status in the first 45 minutes of the game" thing they got going is terrible. DA2 sort of flips that, because they tell you Hawke is a badass in the beginning and the entire game is the tale of how he became that. It's also something much more simple than the convoluted superorganizations they generally use: Hawke is the champion of Kirkwall cause, durr, he saved Kirkwall. Refreshing.
Why don't they name your character and allow you to customize him/her all the way? I don't think that the name matters that much. Appearance, background, origins matter much more. So their excuse "we have to make him human since we need to record less lines" is stupid. And yes, they could find a voice that would fit all races.
Chairman Yang said:
It's depressing that apparently everyone except BioWare can see that all the infantile violence, sexuality and moral railroading in the world won't make their games more appealing to a broader audience - or rather to a healthy broader audience. On the positive side, it at least makes 'the mainstream' largely blameless, since they're not interested in the first place.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Yeah, it does seem like DA2 had some good ideas behind it, they just really really failed at them.VisanidethDM said:
I mean, the two that I've heard that I would care about if I played it was the lack of scope/sense of life in Kirkwall and the complete lack of a sense of passage of time.
VisanidethDM said:
It's a shame though that they squander all that on a tale that lacks any sense of dramatic structure. Just witness the sheer amount of people who quit the game after Act II, as it really feels like you've just hit the climax of the game, except that it doesn't end.
It also doesn't help that Hawke does more to cement and establish his character in the time segments you jump over than he does in the segments you play.
There's a germ of a good idea there, but the execution is horrendous.
VisanidethDM
Banned
Zeliard said:
As a Dark Sun fan, I sort of liked the poorer parts of Kirkwall because it somewhat similar to what you could imagine Tyr like. The idea of Kirkwall is also great - it's the realization that stinks.
subversus said:
I think it's a compromise due to their storytelling format. Think at stuff like TW2, also. It's much more strict than what Bioware does. If you want full creation freedom, you need to give up on voiceacting and some interactivity in the story.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Eh, yes to the former, no to the latter, I would think.VisanidethDM said:
I would have no problem giving up voice acting, but thats just me. I prefer imagining good voices over text then hearing a "voice-actor" try to figure out what inflection and intonation are.
Mister_Bubbles
Member
VisanidethDM said:
It was also one of the biggest sources of disappointment. The devs kept saying it would be up to the player how they became the "Champion" of Kirkwall, and exactly what being the city's Champion meant.
In practice, (as far as the central storyline is concerned) it was just one linear path.
Fimbulvetr
Member
VisanidethDM said:
Too bad some of the other details regarding Hawke's rise to power(his entire first year in Kirkwall) are dubious and you don't really influence anything after becoming the Champion.
subversus said:
A much better reason is that the story they were trying for only really works is Hawke is human.
IoCaster
Member
The_Technomancer said:
Yeah, it's annoying as fuck too. I preferred it when they just addressed your character as "Messere Hawke". Being the so-called 'Champion' didn't amount to much of anything. Your role doesn't change at all in that you still play gopher/errand boy for anyone with a quest marker floating over their head.
Orsino - "Yo, the Champion is here. Let him/her decide."
Hawke - "You're both idiots. I'll be Viscount!"
Merideth - "Ain't happening. Get lost loser!!"
subversus said:
Just a warning, here. Usually whenever a game's story/writing is done by a non-game writer, the writing is atrocious. A lot of those kind of writers just can't handle the player-driven direction or branching necessarily.
Truly good game writing needs truly good game writing, not good tv writing.
subversus said:
My point is that you have to be very careful with that. A lot of companies just hire a screenwriter, slap "FROM THE WRITER OF BLAH BLAH BLAH" on the box, and hope for the best.
If you hire an -actually good- game writer, you end up with writing that wouldn't work in a movie or a tv show but is perfect for a game. (see; Portal series)
Hiring a novel writer causes it's own problems, as novels are long form and full of descriptions and narration. Games are written in dialogue for voice actors and stage directions for 3D modellers, and is broken up and out of order a lot of the time.
It's like hiring an airplane mechanic to work on a limousine. Sure, airplanes are generally a better accomplishment, but unless you stood over him he wouldn't know much about the power train of a car.
Ahoi-Brause
Banned
How would you define a non-game writer?webrunner said:
Wouldn't working on the script of a game turn every normal writer into a game-writer?
And what good game writers are there anyways?
Except for matsuno I can't think of many... to be honest.
VisanidethDM
Banned
Ahoi-Brause said:
Matsuno isn't a standard you can enforce. He's one of a kind.
That said, I agree on the point of not borrowing writers from other medias. It's my beef with G.R.R. Martin. He's a TV writer: he absolutely knows how to grip an audience, and leave it hanging, and shock it, and make it come back for more. His prose however is mediocre, and he couldn't write a coherent plot to save his life.
webrunner said:
I agree. Crysis 2 is a bright example of how horribly a good writer can handle a story in a game.
But that's what a game director for. He should tell the writer how to write a gaming story. Although it should be a good game designer who understands what constitutes a good story for a game.
Ken Levine is the best example for a good gaming writer. He used to write screenplays but he also digs gameplay and all that stuff.
Ahoi-Brause said:
Someone who's writing experience is not in games. Particularly, if the writer's past experience is why he was hired, if that writing was for movies then a good portion of that experience would not only fail to help writing in a game, but result in bad habits making the result worse then if they were less experienced but with more game credits.
As for writers.. Amy Hennig (loK, uncharted), Erik Wolpaw (portal) are other examples.
Erik Wolpaw is a perfect example here, as Psychonauts and Portal were his first two credits as a writer (previous to that he was a Snarky Internet Journalist (tm))
Fimbulvetr
Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIaNMfVADZIAhoi-Brause said:
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
webrunner said:
Ungh. When you try to make the wrong kinds of narrative fit into your square, game shaped hole, you get Metal Gear Solid or THE BABY THE BABY THE BABY THE BABY THE BABY.
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
Yasae said:
Oh wow lol.
Guess he isn't that much popular.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I just checked, that image is legit too. I've never searched the guy or anything related to DA before, and those were the same results I got.Bitmap Frogs said:
EternalGamer
Banned
Since Bioware wants to balance expanding an audience with maintaining their core, I propose that their next game just ask the player one question when you start: "Have you played a lot of RPGS?"
If the player answers No" they get:
-Big giant question marks over new quests and exclamation marks over turn ins.
-A game where you can mash X and win.
-characters that can only upgrade swords and armor as a set and no other loot.
-an option to auto-select skill tree points.
-dialog trees that clearly indicate the consequences of every answer.
If the play answers "Yes, I have played a lot of RPGs" then the game tells them to return the product to the store and go buy The Witcher series instead.
If the player answers No" they get:
-Big giant question marks over new quests and exclamation marks over turn ins.
-A game where you can mash X and win.
-characters that can only upgrade swords and armor as a set and no other loot.
-an option to auto-select skill tree points.
-dialog trees that clearly indicate the consequences of every answer.
If the play answers "Yes, I have played a lot of RPGs" then the game tells them to return the product to the store and go buy The Witcher series instead.
ShockingAlberto
Member
That reminds me of this video I took while playing the game.VisanidethDM said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjUgNKnlmzM
VisanidethDM
Banned
EternalGamer said:
And what makes this even more sad is that The Witcher series aren't exactly the pinnacle of complexity or a crowning achievement of RPG gameplay.
We're truly fucked, us RPG fans. JRPGs are practically dead, a shadow of their former selves, and WRPGs have been in a downward spiral since the 90s.
bigdaddygamebot
Member
Archie said:
4th edition would be REALLY difficult to turn into a "real-time" sort of game.
A significant portion of the combat is positioning and there's a great deal of strategy around "pushing/pulling/sliding" allies and opponents in order to get to a more advantageous position during the fight.
There is NO fucking way the new Bioware would ever make a turn based game...ever.
The real meat of 4th edition is the way the combat has changed and I don't see any developers really jumping into that any time soon because it would be pretty tough to make something feel like 4th edition without doing a turn-based type of deal.
...and you people that don't like Forgotten Realms can go to hell. You can go to Hell's hell...which is further down n' stuff.