adrianbc
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 330 Likes: 582
inherit
2913
0
582
adrianbc
330
Jan 20, 2017 10:05:58 GMT
January 2017
adrianbc
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by adrianbc on Feb 22, 2017 11:20:24 GMT
This is what I'm trying to figure out. What real difference is there, between the smaller, more personal RPG, in which the stakes are lower and the recognition we recieve within the game world are more mundane, compared to those games in which the stakes are of the highest magnitude and the world treats the player as the chosen one, last hope of mankind. Because I do think that it's simply a matter of degrees. It's the same formula but on different scales and will always be the same formula, if a specific narrative, with a story to tell, is going to be involved. The crux is how well that narrative is built, how quickly we progress from nothing, to the center of the universe, if the narrative reaches the apex of the formula. I do think that many developers of cRPG's have fallen into the habit, of rushig through the journey, thereby taking away something intrinsic and worthwhile from the experience and that is what many people are really urked about. It's not the formula that people are fed up with, but the poor handling of it, the use of the same shortcuts, predictable plot hooks and scenarios, that leave a cRPG experience feeling samey, contrived and hollow. The unfailing reliance on the BIG STORY, over the little ones that ought to precede it, but more often then not, don't anymore. I have no doubt that the experience between these two extremes can be profound. I concede that the big story has been done to death within the genre, particularly recently, but that when you get right down to it, it is the same thing. Developers then need to be looking at narrative structure, pacing, consistancy and plausability, within the story they seek to tell, to create something that is actually engaging. Rather than the fast and furious bang and sparkle, that leaves players going "wow!" but then on deeper reflection, once the adrenaline enducing thunder has worn of, feeling dissatisfied and let down. Like they have been rushed through the front door, given a quick glimpse of the structures furnishings, and thrown out the back door with a gift bag full of wet lettuce. That said, I can't help but feel that what some players are trully yearning for, is more of a character driven, simulation, perhaps with emergent stories within the simulation, but not being the primary focus of such. No overarching story at all. But smaller adventures within a setting designed for such. Much like early crpgs were. This is in large part as they were based upon table top rpg's. Already fully created and fleshed out worlds, with already present stories available to choose from, ranging in scope and magnitude. I posit that it is far easier to create that more personable, intimate rpg experience, when a developer is utilising an already crafted IP, with it's own stories already crafted before hand. Theres already a market there, they can afford to take the risk of writing more reserved narratives, with less flash and thunder. I personally found the IP of Pillars to be awfully bland. The story too didn't do much for me either, Tyranny had promise but I feel that it too fell into "saviour of the world" role, without realising that it was doing so. Entirely new IP's that the developer was rushing to establish, rather than allowing to let it grow more fluidly and gain the momentum they needed, in order create a fully realised world with fully realised landscapes, in which players could create characters and stories that have scope from both large and small perspectives. There is a distinction between the Chosen One cliché and the Entire World Under Threat cliché. Many recent games are employing both, but this is not the rule. A game about a supernatural protagonist engaged in personal quests employs the first cliché, and a game about down-to-earth peasant involuntarily involved into a world-ending plot the second cliché. The main problems with such a cliché are frequency of use and predictability. I have very little interest to play a game which end I`m able to predict soon after the start. But my viewpoint is not a general one, and I am perfectly aware that there are many players who love to play RPG`s I`m not interested with for their own reasons. It`s all down to the personal "feel" of the game world, the story, characters, protagonist, combat. Big studios like Bioware, who are owned by a big publisher (and EA is a notoriously nasty one) have to think about RPG formulas likeable for millions of players. For them, sales of 1 million games are a disaster. So they don`t just stick with a trusted formula, but do a lot of research about what features will lead to bigger sales. For instance, they have data collected for each DA game about player decisions, skills/talents chosen, characters played. Each time you`ve played a DA game with DLC`s and needed to be permanently logged to BW servers, they have your data. Using data mining statistics is piece of cake for a big studio. Bioware doesn`t play it blindly. My guess is that EA allowed Bioware a bit of freedom with DA2 after the success of DA:O, but closed that door for DA:I. EA demands sales predictions based on data mining, like every big company out there. Innovation and surprises will more likely come from small studios, who have a much lesser burden to carry. They can take risks not because of better consequences, but because there is no boss who forbid risks in the first place. But such studios are making mostly niche games - RPG`s appealing to some players, but not to a LOT of players. Take Pillars of Eternity for instance. I liked the game very much, not because it was made as a homage for the old Icewind Dale and Baldur`s Gate RPG`s, but because it has an amount of depth no longer used in AAA games. It was made for the old and longtime AD&D fans (mostly over 40 old) and require a lot of reading and thinking about the world of Eora. It takes effort, like the one needed to understand Frank Herbert`s Dune. In my case, it helped that I`ve read hundreds of history books, including social history ones, and a similar amount of fantasy novels. But all this means that the game is niche. My guess is that a RPG with a well written story and plot, remarkable and realistic characters (not just companions), exciting quests and combat and a lot of surprise plot twists will succeed to attract a big following, even if it`s not about the Chosen One or The World is Ending. Good entertainment, in short.
|
|
adrianbc
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 330 Likes: 582
inherit
2913
0
582
adrianbc
330
Jan 20, 2017 10:05:58 GMT
January 2017
adrianbc
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by adrianbc on Feb 22, 2017 11:53:29 GMT
One old school table top RPG that I think creates a perfect environment for the simulation/rpg hybrid, would be the classic world of darkness, centered on the games of Vampire:the Masquerade, Mage:The Ascension and Werewolf. These RPGs had huge, fully realised worlds, choke full of lore and established characters and events that are all taking place throughout the game worlds, regardless of a players actions. The player creates a supernatural PC that gets dropped into this world. Sure each one had a BIG STORY in the background (in the classic worlds iterations, white wolf did away with it in the reboots) but it was a backdrop, a constant threat but hardly the main focus of the players, who's characters became embroiled in the everday details of supernatural life, from running erands for more powerful supernatural agents to amassing their own power base, expanding their own learning. Making and breaking enemies along the way. Creating their own adventures. There was an end game scenario, very end of the world, but the reality was that no matter how powerful the players became, chances were good you likely wouldn't survive it, let alone stop it. I think this is the kind of experience people are looking for. A world that feels real, in that the character you play is a PART of the world in which these stories are taking place and not the CENTER of the world and it's stories. Sure you might get close to the middle of the story, you might have a large hand in deciding fates, but it was never about the character you play, being the story, the true story was the characters you meet, the things that you do on the journey and what you can accomplish with these massive events taking place all around you, that would take place, regardless of whether your character is present or not. This is the angle, I feel cRPG developers fail to really get to grips with, especially when they are dealing with a new IP. I can give you a short example of worldbuilding from one of my all time favorite books: "Invisible Cities" by Italo Calvino. It looks like a novel, based on a loose idea of several casual talks between Marco Polo and Khan Kublai, which are happening when Marco is returning from his travels all over Kublai`s empire. In reality, it`s an amazing exercise of wordbuilding - very short descriptions of around 100 fantasy cities, each one strange and somehow complete. Like this one: "CITIES & THE SKY 3 Those who arrive at Thekla can see little of the city, beyond the plank fences, the sackcloth screens, the scaffolding, the metal armatures, the wooden catwalks hanging from ropes or supported by saw-horses, the ladders, the trestles. If you ask, ‘Why is Thekla’s construction taking such a long time?’ the inhabitants continue hoisting sacks, lowering leaded strings, moving long brushes up and down, as they answer, ‘So that its destruction cannot begin.’ And if asked whether they fear that, once the scaffolding is removed, the city may begin to crumble and fall to pieces, they add hastily, in a whisper, ‘Not only the city.’ If, dissatisfied with the answer, someone puts his eye to a crack in a fence, he sees cranes pulling up other cranes, scaffolding that embraces other scaffolding, beams that prop up other beams. ‘What meaning does your construction have?’ he asks. ‘What is the aim of a city under construction unless it is a city? Where is the plan you are following, the blueprint?’ ‘We will show it to you as soon as the working day is over; we cannot interrupt our work now,’ they answer. Work stops at sunset. Darkness falls over the building site. The sky is filled with stars. ‘There is the blueprint,’ they say."
That`s one city`s full description. And maybe it`s something like this what contemporary RPG games need: new fantasy worlds, with novelty in magic, inhabitants, societies, customs. Something similar to what Brandon Sanderson is doing. Something which shakes the old routines a bit. I like DA games a lot, but let`s face it: dwarfs, elves and dragons are long standing traditions for RPG`s. The qunari were a novelty, but the entire Thedas is too close to our Middle Ages. The same about the Witcher: the same elf and dwarf cliché, set in an Eastern European medieval world look-alike. All very well and consistently done, but a bit too close...
|
|
inherit
3307
0
May 18, 2017 21:36:13 GMT
228
shroomofdoom
165
February 2017
shroomofdoom
|
Post by shroomofdoom on Feb 22, 2017 13:00:56 GMT
That said, I can't help but feel that what some players are trully yearning for, is more of a character driven, simulation, perhaps with emergent stories within the simulation, but not being the primary focus of such. No overarching story at all. But smaller adventures within a setting designed for such. Much like early crpgs were. This is in large part as they were based upon table top rpg's. Already fully created and fleshed out worlds, with already present stories available to choose from, ranging in scope and magnitude. My guess is that a RPG with a well written story and plot, remarkable and realistic characters (not just companions), exciting quests and combat and a lot of surprise plot twists will succeed to attract a big following, even if it`s not about the Chosen One or The World is Ending. Good entertainment, in short. I agree, but the article and many people who agree with it, are, imho, talking about thowing the baby out with the bath water. Now thats not meant as a criticism, but an observation. My concern stems from identifying the poor structure of narrative and world biulding, story pacing and scope as being secondary to complete rejection of already established rpg essentials. In a bid to innovate and re-invigorate, gutting the genre of what makes it distinct, even in it's increasing staleness. I'll always caution against doing so when there are studios out there, as well as IP's available, that are a gold mine for those developers that are willing to take a look at the problem, from a different perspective, with a different set of goals in mind, so as to deliver the next iteration of cRPG's that will come to define the genre's future. I honestly and humbly feel, that it's less about what talents and skills one has available to us, what binary choices we make and more about how those things are represented and portrayed. In much the same way as Brandon Sanderson has done for fantasy fiction. He hasn't re-invented the wheel, he's just using it in a way that hasn't been done before. So it is with the formula, ingredients and elements of cRPG's, all the goods are there to make something awe inspiring, vital and fresh, they just have to be used more intelligently, more artistically and less rigidly and numerically. Companies can do all the data mining they like, garner all the statistics they wish, but it doesn't mean that the data they get is going to be put to any better use, without the right thinking going into the mix to make of all that data something with a bit more soul. It's a problem, that I think would be a mistake, to ascribe only to the cRPG genre, but is industry wide and evident in games, even amongst indie developers. At the risk of sounding like an older gamer, with nolstagia glasses on, when one has seen the arc of game development over a reasonable period of time, we begin to see a pattern of over simplification. Not so much on a technical side, but on a creative side. That may, however be a larger conversation for a different thread.
|
|
Iakus
N7
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 20,882 Likes: 49,344
inherit
402
0
Dec 21, 2018 17:35:11 GMT
49,344
Iakus
20,882
August 2016
iakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Iakus on Feb 22, 2017 14:10:11 GMT
And if they attack the Duchy, what happens to your inn, your farm, your shop, etc? Bad things, I suspect. Some choices may well lead to a very short game. [/quote] True enough. But the point is, you are playing a module about GIANTS. If you ignore them, ignore the story about them, and go do your own thing, then not only is it going to be a short campaign, but why the hell did you put down money for the module to begin with? That depends on your definition of "special" I guess. It doesn't mean you're a Chosen One,destined for greatness. Or even success. But it does make you special in that you are the pov character for this story. And your actions drive the narrative. Take Oblivion, for example. In the end, you were not the hero of the story, but your actions drove it. The world, no. But the story should be more of a cooperative effort between player and developer (since this is a computer game rather than a tabletop, this is, of course, pretty limited) As a previous DM once told my group "This isn't MY story. This is OUR story" Well, given the whole thing was a tale spun by Varric for Cassandra's benefit, one could then argue that he was the protagonist There's no reason why a CRPG can't do that. There exist simulationist games. Also, a strategy game like Crusader Kings II makes for a terrific macro-level RPG.[/quote] Simulation games tend to be story-thin. You might be able to go effect things on a larger scale. But personality, personal stories, and motivations tend to be left behind. At least in my experience, but that's pretty much limited to the Civilization games and the X-Com reboot.
|
|
adrianbc
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 330 Likes: 582
inherit
2913
0
582
adrianbc
330
Jan 20, 2017 10:05:58 GMT
January 2017
adrianbc
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by adrianbc on Feb 22, 2017 14:47:57 GMT
In much the same way as Brandon Sanderson has done for fantasy fiction. He hasn't re-invented the wheel, he's just using it in a way that hasn't been done before. So it is with the formula, ingredients and elements of cRPG's, all the goods are there to make something awe inspiring, vital and fresh, they just have to be used more intelligently, more artistically and less rigidly and numerically. Companies can do all the data mining they like, garner all the statistics they wish, but it doesn't mean that the data they get is going to be put to any better use, without the right thinking going into the mix to make of all that data something with a bit more soul. Well said! I used Brandon Sanderson exactly as an example of what can be done within an established genre, like fantasy novels. True, he uses consistently built magic systems and not some random ideas. But the core of his writing is the entire world, with every aspect of it well thought off and crafted, not just a magic system. Customs, traditions, societies, factions, people, history, biosphere - all make sense together, as a whole. We are able to detect the origins of these elements linked to real culture or custom elements. But it`s just that, a distant echo. Imagine for instance a game based on the magic system from Sanderson`s "The Emperor`s Soul" used by forgers - to change the nature of an object. Or a RPG based on that city description from Italo Calvino - of a fantasy world directly linked to the fate of the universe, or the existence of each god. Data mining is a widespread future-proof solution for risk-adverse big businesses, but the problem is that RPG`s are rather artistic concepts. And one very important artistic feature, which cannot be imitated is creation and novelty. Data mining will never predict for EA how a completely new concept will fare on the market. And because of this, you can guess what happens: EA will hardly let any owned studio to go wild and use something never tried. The maximum "freedom" we can expect is to use successful concepts from other games, like the open-world from Skyrim in DA:I. Still, the DA universe may have some surprises for us, because of the Fade / Veil concepts and the way they were used in games. It has a lot of unused potential. What about for instance of a protagonist with a spirit companion from the Fade? Not a "merged" one, but a Fade spirit with distinct mind and will? Introducing us players to the Fade world proper, not just from dialogues with Anders or Justice? Teaching the protagonist how to create worlds in the Fade? Something like a leap from the current DA setup...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1255
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 15:07:43 GMT
It amuses me when people try to present Hawke as a run-of-the-mill your average unimportant person. Hawke might not be an orphan who found a magic sword, but he is someone that set a chain of events in motion leading to an event that is presented in the game itself as a world-turning point for his verse. Hawke is a Catalist and a Hero as much as most other videogame leads. He is certainly not a vegetable seller who cooks dinners for the party of heroes (heh, we've once made a companion mod like that for BG2, with a salt of the earth guy who was mostly interested in what he is going to feed the party when the quest is done with)
|
|
adrianbc
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 330 Likes: 582
inherit
2913
0
582
adrianbc
330
Jan 20, 2017 10:05:58 GMT
January 2017
adrianbc
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by adrianbc on Feb 22, 2017 15:32:53 GMT
It amuses me when people try to present Hawke as a run-of-the-mill your average unimportant person. Hawke might not be an orphan who found a magic sword, but he is someone that set a chain of events in motion leading to an event that is presented in the game itself as a world-turning point for his verse. Hawke is a Catalist and a Hero as much as most other videogame leads. He is certainly not a vegetable seller who cooks dinners for the party of heroes (heh, we've once made a companion mod like that for BG2, with a salt of the earth guy who was mostly interested in what he is going to feed the party when the quest is done with) It also amuses me when another fan comes with the old and well oiled concept of Hawke being a catalyst. I already presented some arguments about Hawke and the events around Kirkwall not long ago. Problem is, catalyst is a concept used in Chemistry about chemical elements or compounds able to initiate or accelerate a chemical reaction. Thing is, Hawke does not initiate anything important in Kirkwall. Everything was started by Bartrand, Varric, the Arishok, Anders, Dumar, Meredith, Orsino and the Grey Wardens (for Corypheus). All Hawke did in 7 years was to take offered jobs and finish them, even for Aveline. As for accelerating a process, it`s easy: eliminate Hawke completely (say s/he died outside Lothering and never made it to Kirkwall) and everything would have ended the same, or worse (probably worse!) but in about the same time. Even the Corypheus`s escape. If say Bethany and Carver also died, I`m sure there are other Hawke relatives alive for blood.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1255
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 16:43:45 GMT
It amuses me when people try to present Hawke as a run-of-the-mill your average unimportant person. Hawke might not be an orphan who found a magic sword, but he is someone that set a chain of events in motion leading to an event that is presented in the game itself as a world-turning point for his verse. Hawke is a Catalist and a Hero as much as most other videogame leads. He is certainly not a vegetable seller who cooks dinners for the party of heroes (heh, we've once made a companion mod like that for BG2, with a salt of the earth guy who was mostly interested in what he is going to feed the party when the quest is done with) It also amuses me when another fan comes with the old and well oiled concept of Hawke being a catalyst. I already presented some arguments about Hawke and the events around Kirkwall not long ago. Problem is, catalyst is a concept used in Chemistry about chemical elements or compounds able to initiate or accelerate a chemical reaction. Thing is, Hawke does not initiate anything important in Kirkwall. Everything was started by Bartrand, Varric, the Arishok, Anders, Dumar, Meredith, Orsino and the Grey Wardens (for Corypheus). All Hawke did in 7 years was to take offered jobs and finish them, even for Aveline. As for accelerating a process, it`s easy: eliminate Hawke completely (say s/he died outside Lothering and never made it to Kirkwall) and everything would have ended the same, or worse (probably worse!) but in about the same time. Even the Corypheus`s escape. If say Bethany and Carver also died, I`m sure there are other Hawke relatives alive for blood. I disagree. I feel that without Hawke the expedition would not have happened, Arishok would have maintained the control of Kirkwall to whatever mysterious ends, and Anders would have been stewing and healing people. Hawke is Special. Any non-special man would have been lost and begging just like all the other refugees at the Kirkwall's doors and in that lady's help center. Even the Viscount says: You are destined to have the influence above your station. Even hawke's station in life is special, he is a Dsedichado, a love-child of a cursed lineage and a star-crossed love affair. And he repeats that pattern falling for Anders. Without Hawke, there is no DA2... Oh, and it is good to be a source of mutual amusement as how the other completely off the mark despite our very best and the most convincing argument. I respect that. Cheers!
|
|
adrianbc
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 330 Likes: 582
inherit
2913
0
582
adrianbc
330
Jan 20, 2017 10:05:58 GMT
January 2017
adrianbc
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by adrianbc on Feb 22, 2017 16:56:38 GMT
I disagree. I feel that without Hawke the expedition would not have happened, Arishok would have maintained the control of Kirkwall to whatever mysterious ends, and Anders would have been stewing and healing people. Hawke is Special. Any non-special man would have been lost and begging just like all the other refugees at the Kirkwall's doors and in that lady's help center. Even the Viscount says: You are destined to have the influence above your station. Even hawke's station in life is special, he is a Dsedichado, a love-child of a cursed lineage and a star-crossed love affair. And he repeats that pattern falling for Anders. Without Hawke, there is no DA2... Oh, and it is good to be a source of mutual amusement as how the other completely off the mark despite our very best and the most convincing argument. I respect that. Cheers! I disagree completely with your post. Since this is not the place to discuss the fine topic of Hawke`s history in Kirkwall, please read my former posts about Hawke and the events in Kirkwall, or start a new thread about Hawke. Best wishes!
|
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Feb 22, 2017 17:30:08 GMT
It also amuses me when another fan comes with the old and well oiled concept of Hawke being a catalyst. I already presented some arguments about Hawke and the events around Kirkwall not long ago. Problem is, catalyst is a concept used in Chemistry about chemical elements or compounds able to initiate or accelerate a chemical reaction. Thing is, Hawke does not initiate anything important in Kirkwall. Everything was started by Bartrand, Varric, the Arishok, Anders, Dumar, Meredith, Orsino and the Grey Wardens (for Corypheus). All Hawke did in 7 years was to take offered jobs and finish them, even for Aveline. As for accelerating a process, it`s easy: eliminate Hawke completely (say s/he died outside Lothering and never made it to Kirkwall) and everything would have ended the same, or worse (probably worse!) but in about the same time. Even the Corypheus`s escape. If say Bethany and Carver also died, I`m sure there are other Hawke relatives alive for blood. I disagree. I feel that without Hawke the expedition would not have happened, Arishok would have maintained the control of Kirkwall to whatever mysterious ends, and Anders would have been stewing and healing people. Hawke is Special. Any non-special man would have been lost and begging just like all the other refugees at the Kirkwall's doors and in that lady's help center. Even the Viscount says: You are destined to have the influence above your station. Even hawke's station in life is special, he is a Dsedichado, a love-child of a cursed lineage and a star-crossed love affair. And he repeats that pattern falling for Anders. Without Hawke, there is no DA2... Oh, and it is good to be a source of mutual amusement as how the other completely off the mark despite our very best and the most convincing argument. I respect that. Cheers! Not really true. Hawke no matter, or can be catalyst. Everything, what happened in Kirkwall, would happen without Hawke, Hawke at most can to facilitate the occurrence of events. Let's see your examples: this expedition is Bartrand's idea, and he organized. Hawke can help him, with some money and skill. Varric was, who knew from Anders and his maps. Anders came to Kirkwall for Karl. His fate and the refugees was his main reason to stay, not really Hawke. And Karl's fate was the reason that he focused on mages in Kirkwall, not Hawke. (In fact, Hawke can make him uncertain, even if s/he can't to stop him.) And Anders not necessarily needed Hawke's help, only made his job easier. You're right, Hawke surely have some usefull skill, but s/he is far from irreplaceable.
|
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Feb 22, 2017 17:32:52 GMT
It amuses me when people try to present Hawke as a run-of-the-mill your average unimportant person. Hawke might not be an orphan who found a magic sword, but he is someone that set a chain of events in motion leading to an event that is presented in the game itself as a world-turning point for his verse. Hawke is a Catalist and a Hero as much as most other videogame leads. He is certainly not a vegetable seller who cooks dinners for the party of heroes (heh, we've once made a companion mod like that for BG2, with a salt of the earth guy who was mostly interested in what he is going to feed the party when the quest is done with) It also amuses me when another fan comes with the old and well oiled concept of Hawke being a catalyst. I already presented some arguments about Hawke and the events around Kirkwall not long ago. Problem is, catalyst is a concept used in Chemistry about chemical elements or compounds able to initiate or accelerate a chemical reaction. Thing is, Hawke does not initiate anything important in Kirkwall. Everything was started by Bartrand, Varric, the Arishok, Anders, Dumar, Meredith, Orsino and the Grey Wardens (for Corypheus). All Hawke did in 7 years was to take offered jobs and finish them, even for Aveline. As for accelerating a process, it`s easy: eliminate Hawke completely (say s/he died outside Lothering and never made it to Kirkwall) and everything would have ended the same, or worse (probably worse!) but in about the same time. Even the Corypheus`s escape. If say Bethany and Carver also died, I`m sure there are other Hawke relatives alive for blood. (The catalyst not also not initiate –just as Hawke–, only accelerate the reactions –just as Hawke–, as you said...)
|
|
Sylvius the Mad
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 686 Likes: 740
inherit
1078
0
Jul 17, 2019 20:15:37 GMT
740
Sylvius the Mad
686
August 2016
sylvius
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Sylvius the Mad on Feb 22, 2017 18:31:08 GMT
True enough. But the point is, you are playing a module about GIANTS. If you ignore them, ignore the story about them, and go do your own thing, then not only is it going to be a short campaign, but why the hell did you put down money for the module to begin with? Sure, completely ignoring the core premise is likely to make for a suboptimal experience. I'd still like the option. Even if I don't choose it, that the option was there makes the game better. I will enjoy going against the giants if that's a path I actually chose rather than it being the only one available. I remember once I wrote at length about how NWN2 both did this really well and really badly. The level design, even when there was only one place to go, included useless little side areas. So when you did follow the path, that was an actual choice you made. But then plot-wise, the game would describe options, tell you they were bad, and then it turned out they didn't exist at all so there had never even been a choice. I have literally no idea what the story of Oblivion was. That's perhaps my favourite thing about Oblivion. But to your point, I would alwayd rather not be the chosen one. I want success to be a believable consequence of my choices, not an inevitability. CRPGs should do the same. The devs should give us only the framework. Personal motivations can't ever be in an RPG unless the player adds them. The writers don't know nearly enough about the protagonist's personality and motives in order to write such a thing. If ever the writers do assign my character motives, that game has failed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1255
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 19:09:14 GMT
When BioWare developed BG1, the very first thing they tried was to let the player input his or her responces when talking to an npc. Which resulted in the painful and endless "I don't understand thee" Responces from the npc that tried to look for keyword recognition.
Then they were doing three choices, and got criticized for not enough choices. This continues to be more or less what they do. But whenever they offer the player the choices, they have to either guess what you, as a player, might like to say (which inevitably involves a guess at a demographics), or guess at their Main's personality that would appeal to a lot of players, and stay consistent to it. i am of course bias against a guess at demographics because that will in all likelihood create characters more alien to me than Shepard or Hawke.
|
|
inherit
3532
0
Jan 22, 2022 10:09:38 GMT
2,504
ComedicSociopathy
1,037
Feb 12, 2017 21:39:59 GMT
February 2017
delightdul
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by ComedicSociopathy on Feb 23, 2017 0:49:10 GMT
I dunno, I always felt that Hawke was another Chosen One with only minor changes.
Survived some kind of terrible personal tragedy. Check. Team of diverse weirdoes at your beck and call. Check. Rises to power and fame. Check. Can solve most of their problems with violence and not suffer major consequences. Check. Is apparently the only person capable of dealing with settings problems because everyone else is frighteningly incompetent. OH MAKER, CHECK.
The character didn't have any special abilities and yes they weren't out to save the world, but that honestly just created a bunch of new narrative problems. Like why everyone was willing to drop everything to help you out at moments notice even when it meant committing criminal activities? Why characters who actively hate each other would work together for your sake when your apparently just some dude/dudette that helped them out? Why doesn't Fenris or Anders or Aveline call it quits or outright attack you ala Wynne in DA:O when you do something that goes against their very strong beliefs? Why you don't leave that freaking shithole of a city the moment you hit it rich?!
|
|
inherit
3307
0
May 18, 2017 21:36:13 GMT
228
shroomofdoom
165
February 2017
shroomofdoom
|
Post by shroomofdoom on Feb 23, 2017 9:42:53 GMT
In much the same way as Brandon Sanderson has done for fantasy fiction. He hasn't re-invented the wheel, he's just using it in a way that hasn't been done before. So it is with the formula, ingredients and elements of cRPG's, all the goods are there to make something awe inspiring, vital and fresh, they just have to be used more intelligently, more artistically and less rigidly and numerically. Companies can do all the data mining they like, garner all the statistics they wish, but it doesn't mean that the data they get is going to be put to any better use, without the right thinking going into the mix to make of all that data something with a bit more soul. Imagine for instance a game based on the magic system from Sanderson`s "The Emperor`s Soul" used by forgers - to change the nature of an object. Or a RPG based on that city description from Italo Calvino - of a fantasy world directly linked to the fate of the universe, or the existence of each god. Data mining is a widespread future-proof solution for risk-adverse big businesses, but the problem is that RPG`s are rather artistic concepts. And one very important artistic feature, which cannot be imitated is creation and novelty. Data mining will never predict for EA how a completely new concept will fare on the market. And because of this, you can guess what happens: EA will hardly let any owned studio to go wild and use something never tried. The maximum "freedom" we can expect is to use successful concepts from other games, like the open-world from Skyrim in DA:I. Still, the DA universe may have some surprises for us, because of the Fade / Veil concepts and the way they were used in games. It has a lot of unused potential. What about for instance of a protagonist with a spirit companion from the Fade? Not a "merged" one, but a Fade spirit with distinct mind and will? Introducing us players to the Fade world proper, not just from dialogues with Anders or Justice? Teaching the protagonist how to create worlds in the Fade? Something like a leap from the current DA setup... One of my favourite stories by Sanderson, The EMperor's Souls was phenominally good and I'd love to see a game that could make the concept really work, alas, I doubt it would be a simple task, in the least. And I agree that DA still has alot to offer but I'm not afraid to admit that Bioware are limited at this point, in terms of the scope and variety of roles that they can offer the player, while still advancing the narrative they have constructed, for the next title or two anyway. I agree to a point with this. Regardless of just about anything else, once you have a story to be told, and the player takes part in that story, no matter how one slices it, our character becomes the fulcrum upon which that story revolves, unfolds and plays out, unless we assume the role of a bystander, with no actual input or hand on events. Thats abut as interactive as a movie. Not, in my estimation atleast, what a cRPG is about at all. Nor one I'd have much interest in playing AS an RPG. There are a number of walking simulators out there that I have enjoyed for what they are, but if they had been touted as an RPG and what I got was a walking simulator, I'd be rather cheesed. I don't think we can divorce the RPG genre, from the narrative and a character that is an active participant within that narrative and still have the game be an RPG. It becomes a simulator or sandbox game. Which are fine and dandy. I enjoy those too, from time to time. But if players are looking for a sandbox experience, with RPG elements, I'd like developers to develop such games, from the simulator/sandbox vantage point and not seek to repurpose the RPG genre and have that become the new hybrid and traditional RPG's be left behind as they are regarded as inherently flawed, broken or exhausted. In order to re-invigorate and renew the RPG genre, I think it comes down to a need for a better creative vision, not just a drive to get as many fad game mechanics and features into your end product as possible while adding a narrative and game world/characters as an afterthought or as window dressing. A complete synergy in design, from start to finish, with the setting and the story/characters being the linchpins upon which the mechanical and technical aspects of the game are added later. So, where is the story taking place, what tale will be told, what themes are being driven home to the players, what role will the players assume within the narrative, will they shape the events of a handful of npc's lives, save a town or city, defeat an overwhelming evil, are they themselves the great evil. Here it's about identifying the scope of the narrative, does the game really need to bow down to the chosen one super hero cliche? Does the narrative really need that or would including it just about about "empowering" the player, if so, don't go there, it will detract from the overall product, not bring anything worthwhile, there are other, more nuanced ways of making the player feel like the things they do in the game have meaning and value. What manner of npcs will the player encounter and how will the player be interacting with the world. Do you need companions? Do you need a BIG BAD to face down again, or is the narrative one that would suffer from a tagged on super villain, for no better reasons than, the players need someone to fight at the end. From this point forward you begin to add in the key features of the design, character abilities should grow up around these ideas, not have the narrative and overall design philosophy be built around what developers want to allow the players to do to feel awesome. Choices available in the narrative should stem from these ideas, how we interact with various npc's be they companions or in world persons of importance, local people and their local issues and problems. Does the narrative call for everyone to be fawning over the PC? The scope of the narrative will define the locations and the scope of those locations, does the developer really need the vast open spaces, pretty though they may be, filled with mundane collections and busywork to pad them out, so you can have mounts, because thats what those other succesful games had, so thats what this game needs.... just, no. I think it comes down to the design approach for games in general. Too many developers are so busy trying to give players all the latest boondoggles and widgedeboos, that they forget to create something of any real substance. We get a mishmash of features, with a half backed story tagged onto the end, rather than a complete, focused masterwork of craft and design.
|
|
Iakus
N7
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 20,882 Likes: 49,344
inherit
402
0
Dec 21, 2018 17:35:11 GMT
49,344
Iakus
20,882
August 2016
iakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Iakus on Feb 23, 2017 16:15:58 GMT
True enough. But the point is, you are playing a module about GIANTS. If you ignore them, ignore the story about them, and go do your own thing, then not only is it going to be a short campaign, but why the hell did you put down money for the module to begin with? Sure, completely ignoring the core premise is likely to make for a suboptimal experience. I'd still like the option. Even if I don't choose it, that the option was there makes the game better. I will enjoy going against the giants if that's a path I actually chose rather than it being the only one available. Then you may like Torment: Tides of Numenera: I certainly don't disagree. That would certainly be the ideal, but until a game can react to any and every possible reaction by a player, at least some railroading and contrivance is needed to get the ball rolling. Personal motivations can't ever be in an RPG unless the player adds them. The writers don't know nearly enough about the protagonist's personality and motives in order to write such a thing. If ever the writers do assign my character motives, that game has failed.[/quote] But the opportunity for the player to add a motivation is precisely what I mean. Something beyond "you're all sitting in a bar one day..."
|
|
Sylvius the Mad
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 686 Likes: 740
inherit
1078
0
Jul 17, 2019 20:15:37 GMT
740
Sylvius the Mad
686
August 2016
sylvius
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Sylvius the Mad on Feb 23, 2017 19:22:17 GMT
That would certainly be the ideal, but until a game can react to any and every possible reaction by a player, at least some railroading and contrivance is needed to get the ball rolling. Contrivance, sure. Railroading, I'm not convinced. I don't think the game necessarily needs to know what that motivation is. As I see it, the only barrier preventing the player from adding a motivation is the game doing it for him. As long as the game doesn't do that, the player is free to do so.
|
|
Kabraxal
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 1,004 Likes: 2,731
inherit
3790
0
2,731
Kabraxal
1,004
Feb 23, 2017 18:40:36 GMT
February 2017
kabraxal
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Kabraxal on Feb 23, 2017 20:23:33 GMT
I disagree with almost everything in that article... not only from one person's assertion that the current landscape has been "disappointing", naturally with full and unsubstantiated digs at Inquisition, but all the way to this need for set protagonists and "tighter" stories. Inquisition is one of the best RPGs I've played because it gave me everything I wanted: the ability to actually role play, customization, great character work, great world design, and an intelligent story and world that doesn't feel the need to scream at me that something is evil, wrong, or even wonderful.
Also, highly disappointed that my initial worry that there would be some more "but Witcher!" bandwagon would show up was proven absolutely true. I am so tired of hearing about that game. It isn't the epitome of RPGs. Personally, I find it to be one of the worst examples of an actual RPG you can find.
|
|
inherit
✜ Forge Mechanic
352
0
Aug 30, 2023 16:01:17 GMT
6,256
PapaCharlie9
3,851
August 2016
papacharlie9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by PapaCharlie9 on Feb 23, 2017 20:40:06 GMT
That would certainly be the ideal, but until a game can react to any and every possible reaction by a player, at least some railroading and contrivance is needed to get the ball rolling. Contrivance, sure. Railroading, I'm not convinced. I don't think the game necessarily needs to know what that motivation is. As I see it, the only barrier preventing the player from adding a motivation is the game doing it for him. As long as the game doesn't do that, the player is free to do so. I'll repeat a point I made earlier, since it's relevant to the Iakus vs Sylvius exchange: I think the best of both worlds is that the first run is railroaded -- you sacrifice most of your player agency for the sake of experiencing a well-crafted story. In the second and subsequent runs, you can ignore the story altogether. I even suggested making this a setting the player can control: Story or Choice, pick one. You can switch from Story to Choice mid-game, but not the reverse. Extrapolating further, wouldn't it be interesting if you could completely control the initial story parameters from the very beginning? Something like a mini Dragon's Age Keep, but instead of just a few binary choices, you can direct the "story" into one of five trajectories. The first four would be factional: side with Mages, or Templars, or Wardens, or Red Jenny. The fifth would be no arc at all, you'll make your own story (emergent gameplay). Siding with a faction changes the main narrative, perhaps significantly. For example, perhaps siding with the mages turns the game into a running battle against Alexius, hopping through time. While siding with the Red Jenny's puts the whole Corypheus conflict in the background, war like any other war, and focuses on refugees and servants surviving and getting one over on the nobility lining up behind one side or another. All of the PC's influence would be on a local band of little people. It would essentially be a bundle of four games in one. Of course, the downside is that it will cost more than 4x as much effort to finish the game, or the story length will only be a quarter as long, but maybe that's worth it? It's not that far from what Skyrim did, after all.
|
|
inherit
✜ Forge Mechanic
352
0
Aug 30, 2023 16:01:17 GMT
6,256
PapaCharlie9
3,851
August 2016
papacharlie9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by PapaCharlie9 on Feb 23, 2017 20:49:32 GMT
Inquisition is one of the best RPGs I've played because it gave me everything I wanted: the ability to actually role play Please explain this in more detail. How exactly did DAI give you the ability to actually role play? Role play what kinds of characters? Over what range and degrees of freedom? For the record, I don't agree, but I'm willing to be persuaded. Don't get me wrong, I think DAI is a great game, I just would not associate it with role playing in any way, shape or form.
|
|
Kabraxal
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 1,004 Likes: 2,731
inherit
3790
0
2,731
Kabraxal
1,004
Feb 23, 2017 18:40:36 GMT
February 2017
kabraxal
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Kabraxal on Feb 23, 2017 21:09:44 GMT
Inquisition is one of the best RPGs I've played because it gave me everything I wanted: the ability to actually role play Please explain this in more detail. How exactly did DAI give you the ability to actually role play? Role play what kinds of characters? Over what range and degrees of freedom? For the record, I don't agree, but I'm willing to be persuaded. Don't get me wrong, I think DAI is a great game, I just would not associate it with role playing in any way, shape or form.
Inquisition gives me plenty of opportunities to mold the opinions, quirks, and personality of each Inquisitor. From politics, to religion, to spirituality, to pragmatism versus idealism it felt like I had the power of "creating' the character and getting to play within the framework of the game. Is it as "free" as pen and paper? No. But Origins and Inquisition are two of the best attempts at giving the player the power over their character, even if the limits of current game design create some obvious limitations. Even still, I was able to customise elements of Skyhold, meet out judgment fitting each Inquisitor, make decisions on the mages and Templars as each saw fit, and even got to shape the Chantry.
From devout Andrastien mage skeptical of politics and massive reformation while still holding some romantic and idealistic views to my cynical elf weary of all religion, gladly engages in political underhandedness, and willing to destroy the current systems to build completely anew all the way to my coverted Qunari that is a meld of the two and then my noble swordsmen trying to find meaning in the Qun..... that is a lot and that isn't even taking into account the way the world, romances, and quests are designed to engage in those quirks of each character.
I have created massively different characters and Inquisition rarely gets in the way of playing those characters. That is fantastic role playing for me. There are actually very few games that give me that level of role playing then manage to engage in those characters on a deeper level. Inquisition and Origins are the prime examples of great role playing in the gaming medium.
|
|
inherit
✜ Forge Mechanic
352
0
Aug 30, 2023 16:01:17 GMT
6,256
PapaCharlie9
3,851
August 2016
papacharlie9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by PapaCharlie9 on Feb 23, 2017 21:35:57 GMT
Please explain this in more detail. How exactly did DAI give you the ability to actually role play? Role play what kinds of characters? Over what range and degrees of freedom? For the record, I don't agree, but I'm willing to be persuaded. Don't get me wrong, I think DAI is a great game, I just would not associate it with role playing in any way, shape or form.
Inquisition gives me plenty of opportunities to mold the opinions, quirks, and personality of each Inquisitor. From politics, to religion, to spirituality, to pragmatism versus idealism it felt like I had the power of "creating' the character and getting to play within the framework of the game. Is it as "free" as pen and paper? No. But Origins and Inquisition are two of the best attempts at giving the player the power over their character, even if the limits of current game design create some obvious limitations. Even still, I was able to customise elements of Skyhold, meet out judgment fitting each Inquisitor, make decisions on the mages and Templars as each saw fit, and even got to shape the Chantry.
From devout Andrastien mage skeptical of politics and massive reformation while still holding some romantic and idealistic views to my cynical elf weary of all religion, gladly engages in political underhandedness, and willing to destroy the current systems to build completely anew all the way to my coverted Qunari that is a meld of the two and then my noble swordsmen trying to find meaning in the Qun..... that is a lot and that isn't even taking into account the way the world, romances, and quests are designed to engage in those quirks of each character.
I have created massively different characters and Inquisition rarely gets in the way of playing those characters. That is fantastic role playing for me. There are actually very few games that give me that level of role playing then manage to engage in those characters on a deeper level. Inquisition and Origins are the prime examples of great role playing in the gaming medium.
Okay, that's a pretty good summary of the character choices in DAI. Would you agree, though, that some common degrees of freedom permitted by other RPGs are sorely lacking? Like playing an evil character? Or a character that wants nothing to do with the responsibility of leadership? Or a character whose only interest is lucre? Or conquest? Not possible in DAI, but possible in games like Skyrim or Fallout 3. No game approaches pen & paper full-on improvisation, I agree, but many games offer a lot more degrees of freedom in role playing than DAI does. DAI doesn't allow you to wander very far from the Chosen One Hero role. You can be a cruel and selfish Hero or a caring and compassionate Hero, but you're stuck being a Hero. Particularly when those choices, kind or cruel, make no material difference to anything, story or gameplay. To me, that's too many limitations on role playing, to the point where I don't know what to call it anymore. Role mimicking?
|
|
Kabraxal
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 1,004 Likes: 2,731
inherit
3790
0
2,731
Kabraxal
1,004
Feb 23, 2017 18:40:36 GMT
February 2017
kabraxal
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Kabraxal on Feb 23, 2017 21:58:54 GMT
Inquisition gives me plenty of opportunities to mold the opinions, quirks, and personality of each Inquisitor. From politics, to religion, to spirituality, to pragmatism versus idealism it felt like I had the power of "creating' the character and getting to play within the framework of the game. Is it as "free" as pen and paper? No. But Origins and Inquisition are two of the best attempts at giving the player the power over their character, even if the limits of current game design create some obvious limitations. Even still, I was able to customise elements of Skyhold, meet out judgment fitting each Inquisitor, make decisions on the mages and Templars as each saw fit, and even got to shape the Chantry.
From devout Andrastien mage skeptical of politics and massive reformation while still holding some romantic and idealistic views to my cynical elf weary of all religion, gladly engages in political underhandedness, and willing to destroy the current systems to build completely anew all the way to my coverted Qunari that is a meld of the two and then my noble swordsmen trying to find meaning in the Qun..... that is a lot and that isn't even taking into account the way the world, romances, and quests are designed to engage in those quirks of each character.
I have created massively different characters and Inquisition rarely gets in the way of playing those characters. That is fantastic role playing for me. There are actually very few games that give me that level of role playing then manage to engage in those characters on a deeper level. Inquisition and Origins are the prime examples of great role playing in the gaming medium.
Okay, that's a pretty good summary of the character choices in DAI. Would you agree, though, that some common degrees of freedom permitted by other RPGs are sorely lacking? Like playing an evil character? Or a character that wants nothing to do with the responsibility of leadership? Or a character whose only interest is lucre? Or conquest? Not possible in DAI, but possible in games like Skyrim or Fallout 3. No game approaches pen & paper full-on improvisation, I agree, but many games offer a lot more degrees of freedom in role playing than DAI does. DAI doesn't allow you to wander very far from the Chosen One Hero role. You can be a cruel and selfish Hero or a caring and compassionate Hero, but you're stuck being a Hero. Particularly when those choices, kind or cruel, make no material difference to anything, story or gameplay. To me, that's too many limitations on role playing, to the point where I don't know what to call it anymore. Role mimicking? Fallout and Elder Scrolls are about the only franchises I'd say come close to offering both role playing freedom and story/character depth that Bioware offers. They tack a little to the role playing freedom, sacrificing both the over arching narrative and the character interactions for more freedom. Bioware sacrifices some of the freedom for narrative purposes and creating intense character interactions that are the hallmark of their games.
I prefer Bioware's approach, since it creates a far more emotional and personal experience while still giving an intense role playing experience. You have to play within some more limitations than Bethesda titles, but in many ways, you actually get some more role playing options in other areas as romances, rivalries, and friendships are integrated in the role playing. Bethesda struggles there. I'd say Bioware and Bethesda are about equal, they just tend towards certain areas of the role playing experience that make them a little different.
|
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Feb 23, 2017 22:44:05 GMT
Okay, that's a pretty good summary of the character choices in DAI. Would you agree, though, that some common degrees of freedom permitted by other RPGs are sorely lacking? Like playing an evil character? Or a character that wants nothing to do with the responsibility of leadership? Or a character whose only interest is lucre? Or conquest? Not possible in DAI, but possible in games like Skyrim or Fallout 3. No game approaches pen & paper full-on improvisation, I agree, but many games offer a lot more degrees of freedom in role playing than DAI does. DAI doesn't allow you to wander very far from the Chosen One Hero role. You can be a cruel and selfish Hero or a caring and compassionate Hero, but you're stuck being a Hero. Particularly when those choices, kind or cruel, make no material difference to anything, story or gameplay. To me, that's too many limitations on role playing, to the point where I don't know what to call it anymore. Role mimicking? Fallout and Elder Scrolls are about the only franchises I'd say come close to offering both role playing freedom and story/character depth that Bioware offers. They tack a little to the role playing freedom, sacrificing both the over arching narrative and the character interactions for more freedom. Bioware sacrifices some of the freedom for narrative purposes and creating intense character interactions that are the hallmark of their games. I prefer Bioware's approach, since it creates a far more emotional and personal experience while still giving an intense role playing experience. You have to play within some more limitations than Bethesda titles, but in many ways, you actually get some more role playing options in other areas as romances, rivalries, and friendships are integrated in the role playing. Bethesda struggles there. I'd say Bioware and Bethesda are about equal, they just tend towards certain areas of the role playing experience that make them a little different.
About the freedom: For example Hawke more personal to me, I felt this poor dialog options good enough to tell a good story. Probably not for an open world (TES or Fallout). And the Inquisitor's playfield not bigger than Hawke's. (And s/he haven't more dialogie options for shading his/her character.) No matter, than the Inquisitor is an "elfy" elf, or dwarf, vasoth or noble Andrastian, s/he still working for the Chantry. As I felt, s/he wasn't the leader, he was the Chosen One, who needed to Cassandra and Leliana to rebuilt the Chantry, so the real leaders of the Inquisition are Leliana and Cassandra, with Josephine's and Cullen's help, and the Inquisitor's hand needed to close the big bad holes in the sky. Maybe this just me, but Hawke's story was at least honest. Hawke's decisions not really matter, s/he only can affect his/her friends, but they are still acting independently, just as Inquisitor's companions, who joined to avert the danger, and stay not because they was friends, only for their cause. Inquisitor's opportunities only seemingly bigger. (My opinion – and I like Inquisition.)
|
|
Kabraxal
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 1,004 Likes: 2,731
inherit
3790
0
2,731
Kabraxal
1,004
Feb 23, 2017 18:40:36 GMT
February 2017
kabraxal
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Kabraxal on Feb 23, 2017 23:12:36 GMT
Fallout and Elder Scrolls are about the only franchises I'd say come close to offering both role playing freedom and story/character depth that Bioware offers. They tack a little to the role playing freedom, sacrificing both the over arching narrative and the character interactions for more freedom. Bioware sacrifices some of the freedom for narrative purposes and creating intense character interactions that are the hallmark of their games. I prefer Bioware's approach, since it creates a far more emotional and personal experience while still giving an intense role playing experience. You have to play within some more limitations than Bethesda titles, but in many ways, you actually get some more role playing options in other areas as romances, rivalries, and friendships are integrated in the role playing. Bethesda struggles there. I'd say Bioware and Bethesda are about equal, they just tend towards certain areas of the role playing experience that make them a little different.
About the freedom: For example Hawke more personal to me, I felt this poor dialog options good enough to tell a good story. Probably not for an open world (TES or Fallout). And the Inquisitor's playfield not bigger than Hawke's. (And s/he haven't more dialogie options for shading his/her character.) No matter, than the Inquisitor is an "elfy" elf, or dwarf, vasoth or noble Andrastian, s/he still working for the Chantry. As I felt, s/he wasn't the leader, he was the Chosen One, who needed to Cassandra and Leliana to rebuilt the Chantry, so the real leaders of the Inquisition are Leliana and Cassandra, with Josephine's and Cullen's help, and the Inquisitor's hand needed to close the big bad holes in the sky. Maybe this just me, but Hawke's story was at least honest. Hawke's decisions not really matter, s/he only can affect his/her friends, but they are still acting independently, just as Inquisitor's companions, who joined to avert the danger, and stay not because they was friends, only for their cause. Inquisitor's opportunities only seemingly bigger. (My opinion – and I like Inquisition.) While the Inquisition starts as an edict from the Chantry, it is essentially free of it. Many of the choices and dialogues with characters throughout the game can let you declare the intent of your Inquisitor towards the Chantry overall.
As for the story and the way the cast is held together... I enjoyed Inquisition's take with how they are brought together because of the threat but then you can affect the reasons for why they stay, what happens when the threat is gone, and ultimately on the future for many of these companions and advisors. And watching the ties between NPCs grow and alter based on choices was extremely intriguing, and I think something that had been started in DA2 and expanded on.
|
|