Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

The Witcher CDPR and Bioware make identical games.

Eyestabber

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
4,733
Location
HUEland
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015
Games of the same type within the same genre, targeting the same demographic are in their essence the same*

Didn't Twitcher 3 sell more than DA:I and Andromeda?

Also, comparing Twitcher 3 with Andromeda is kinda insulting...

It did, and even tho I never played DAI or Andromeda (I dropped bioware after DA2/ME2) I think I know why. Witcher 3 is a much superior implementation of the Bioware Formula than either of those two games. I would even argue that TW3 actually improved on the formula by adding some elements of its own (that were actually copied from other games). Let's see, I wonder if TW3 has...

- A cast of NPCs consisting of:

- A little sister/brother NPC that is a bit of a scoundrel, but is actually very caring and well meaning.

256

- A REALLY bossy female character that thinks she is the one in charge BUT if you put up with her shit long enough she rewards you with some pussy.

latest

- A big brother NPC who is a badass, gives zero fucks and (for some unfathomable reason) DOES NOT bully you after school.

latest

- Really sweet girl who was a victim of circumstance, misjudged by society but finds in the PC the loving, caring and understanding protector she so desperately needs.
PERFECT execution on that one, btw. In case you didn't guess:
maxresdefault.jpg
Keira Metz fills that niche as well, because Merigold only shows up once you reach Novigrad. Can't let the player traverse Velen without a sweet-but-misunderstood-girl sidekick, now can we?

- Father figure. This one is fucking obvious:
latest
- Lastly, leh funneh edgy NPC is optional (Letto).

Two improvements on the formula that I noticed: (i) they were wise enough to make the "whiny beta male" a temporary companion, thus cutting your interactions with him to a minimum. He IS in the game, tho (Lambert). He just isn't around long enough for you to start ripping your hair in frustration at his constant whining. and (ii) there is a new character on the formula: your virtual daughter (Ciri). Having a virtual daughter around is apparently the new "cool" thing and has been proven to work in other games (Bioshock infinity and that faggy consolepleb game). The new God of War is experimenting with a virtual son. Let's see how that goes.

- A world that DOES revolve around the player:
Even if CDPR did their very best to deliver a credible world that feels alive and interesting, deep down it DOES revolve around the player. Geralt is Mr. Witcher badass, and wherever he goes everyone treats him like the fucking BOSS he is. NPCs are submissive, people in power will ALWAYS acknowledge you AND ofc you make "big choices that will forever change the world"™. Your virtual daughter literally saves the entire fucking universe with her magicool pussy powers AND your actions regarding whether or not you're gonna take the sidequest to murder a fucking KING determines the outcome of the entire fucking WAR.

- A design philosophy that prevents the player from ever failing:
Not only does TW3 makes it impossible for the player to fail, builds in the game clearly follow Sawyer's design philosophy. So, again, another improvement on the BW formula. You have 3 perk trees of mostly irrelevant shit that lets you do the exact same thing, but like 5% better. The game is completely beatable on maximum difficulty with a recently respec'ed character with 0 perks. Because the encounters are balanced around PASSIVE (level scaled) progression. D:OS2 shares this exact same trait. TW3 also features respecs, if you really feel like you NEED that 5% boost. The game also implemented level scaled + color coded itemization, same with D:OS2 and a sad new standard for RGPs in general. Because deciding between "+1 sword of awesome evil slaying (+1d6 dmg vs evil)" and "+2 sword of all aroundness" was simply too fucking hard. With a big "level" number and standarized color coding (notice how the color scheme is almost the same over multiple games?) we ensure retards won't EVER equip the wrong item EVER again!!!!

- No blanks to be filled/no ambiguity:

Only point where you could argue for the existence of some deviation from the formula. Essentially, they figured out their audience wasn't THAT stupid and could handle at least fedora-tier moral ambiguity ("both sides are bad, m'kay"). The main plot points, tho...nothing ambiguous about them. Geralt is awesome, King of the Hunt is a jerk, Mages dindu nothing (Novigrad line) and so on. Props on the Bloody Baron questline, but that questline filled all our "moral ambiguity" budget and it's time for a hail mary heroine (Ciri) to save the world against big baddie #3234353465. Again.

So, in conclusion: TW3 is a more-than-perfect execution of the Bioware Formula. The game DOES share a similarity with classic BW, there is no denying it. The keyword here is "similar". "Similarity" is a highly debated concept in philosophy, since it's includes both identity AND non-identity. You can't claim it's the same thing, but you can't claim it's completely different either. Because it's, welll...SIMILAR.

Lastly: notice how the formula, as I understand it, says NOTHING about how combat is supposed to play out or what camera angle is best? Because it doesn't really matter. I legit believe someone could make a "story driven FPS" following the BW formula to a T. Another sidenote: I feel like TW3 is more faithful to the formula than D:OS2. Larian is clearly trying to put their own spin on things. Yet I feel like if they ditch their cast of thinly veiled progressive stereotypes and replaced them with a BW+ cast of pandering NPCs, their next game will be able to reach Skyrim levels of sales. But's just my 2 cents.
 
Last edited:

Theldaran

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 10, 2015
Messages
1,772
Maybe BG's items were hard to compare but even as an adolescent I knew which were better, also I had some notions of D&D. Does anybody need level-locked, colour-coded items and if so they deserve a nice kick in the ass.

In the end I replay the BGs a lot because I'm pretty much an OCD and need those shiny items with kewl backstories that I never care to read, POE's itemisation was nothing short of an insult, I don't know about Twitcher but I highly doubt Kingmaker will get itemisation right. Fingers crossed.
 

DexRiwus

Novice
Joined
May 17, 2018
Messages
59
Games of the same type within the same genre, targeting the same demographic are in their essence the same*

Didn't Twitcher 3 sell more than DA:I and Andromeda?

Also, comparing Twitcher 3 with Andromeda is kinda insulting...

It did, and even tho I never played DAI or Andromeda (I dropped bioware after DA2/ME2) I think I know why. Witcher 3 is a much superior implementation of the Bioware Formula than either of those two games. I would even argue that TW3 actually improved on the formula by adding some elements of its own (that were actually copied from other games). Let's see, I wonder if TW3 has...

- A cast of NPCs consisting of:

- A little sister/brother NPC that is a bit of a scoundrel, but is actually very caring and well meaning.

256

- A REALLY bossy female character that thinks she is the one in charge BUT if you put up with her shit long enough she rewards you with some pussy.

latest

- A big brother NPC who is a badass, gives zero fucks and (for some unfathomable reason) DOES NOT bully you after school.

latest

- Really sweet girl who was a victim of circumstance, misjudged by society but finds in the PC the loving, caring and understanding protector she so desperately needs.
PERFECT execution on that one, btw. In case you didn't guess:
maxresdefault.jpg
Keira Metz fills that niche as well, because Merigold only shows up once you reach Novigrad. Can't let the player traverse Velen without a sweet-but-misunderstood-girl sidekick, now can we?

- Father figure. This one is fucking obvious:
latest
- Lastly, leh funneh edgy NPC is optional (Letto).

Two improvements on the formula that I noticed: (i) they were wise enough to make the "whiny beta male" a temporary companion, thus cutting your interactions with him to a minimum. He IS in the game, tho (Lambert). He just isn't around long enough for you to start ripping your hair in frustration at his constant whining. and (ii) there is a new character on the formula: your virtual daughter (Ciri). Having a virtual daughter around is apparently the new "cool" thing and has been proven to work in other games (Bioshock infinity and that faggy consolepleb game). The new God of War is experimenting with a virtual son. Let's see how that goes.

- A world that DOES revolve around the player: even if CDPR did their very best to deliver a credible world that feels alive and interesting, deep down it DOES revolve around the player. Geralt is Mr. Witcher badass, and wherever he goes everyone treats him like the fucking BOSS he is. NPCs are submissive, people in power will ALWAYS acknowledge you AND ofc you make "big choices that will forever change the world"™. Your virtual daughter literally saves the entire fucking universe with her magicool pussy powers AND your actions regarding whether or not you're gonna take the sidequest to murder a fucking KING determines the outcome of the entire fucking WAR.

- A design philosophy that prevents the player from ever failing: not only does TW3 makes it impossible for the player to fail, builds in the game clearly follow Sawyer's design philosophy. So, again, another improvement on the BW formula. You have 3 perk trees of mostly irrelevant shit that lets you do the exact same thing, but like 5% better. The game is completely beatable on maximum difficulty with a recently respec'ed character with 0 perks. Because the encounters are balanced around PASSIVE (level scaled) progression. D:OS2 shares this exact same trait. TW3 also features respecs, if you really feel like you NEED that 5% boost. The game also implemented level scaled + color coded itemization, same with D:OS2 and a sad new standard for RGPs in general. Because deciding between "+1 sword of awesome evil slaying (+1d6 dmg vs evil)" and "+2 sword of all aroundness" was simply too fucking hard. With a big "level" number and standarized color coding (notice how the color scheme is almost the same over multiple games?) we ensure retards won't EVER equip the wrong item EVER again!!!!

- No blanks to be filled/no ambiguity:
only point where you could argue for the existence of some deviation from the formula. Essentially, they figured out their audience wasn't THAT stupid and could handle at least fedora-tier moral ambiguity ("both sides are bad, m'kay"). The main plot points, tho...nothing ambiguous about them. Geralt is awesome, King of the Hunt is a jerk, Mages dindu nothing (Novigrad line) and so on. Props on the Bloody Baron questline, but that questline filled all our "moral ambiguity" budget and it's time for a hail mary heroine (Ciri) to save the world against big baddie #3234353465. Again.



So, in conclusion: TW3 is a more-than-perfect execution of the Bioware Formula. The game DOES share a similarity with classic BW, there is no denying it. The keyword here is "similar". "Similarity" is a highly debated concept in philosophy, since it's includes both identity AND non-identity. You can't claim it's the same thing, but you can't claim it's completely different either. Because it's, welll...SIMILAR.

Lastly: notice how the formula, as I understand it, says NOTHING about how combat is supposed to play out or what camera angle is best? Because it doesn't really matter. I legit believe someone could make a "story driven FPS" following the BW formula to a T. Another sidenote: I feel like TW3 is more faithful to the formula than D:OS2. Larian is clearly trying to put their own spin on things. Yet I feel like if they ditch their cast of thinly veiled progressive stereotypes and replaced them with a BW+ cast of pandering NPCs, their next game will be able to reach Skyrim levels of sales. But's just my 2 cents.
Well, both OS2 and W3 do not fit your "you can't miss content and get undesired outcomes" point, so that one should be removed.
 

DexRiwus

Novice
Joined
May 17, 2018
Messages
59
Maybe BG's items were hard to compare but even as an adolescent I knew which were better, also I had some notions of D&D. Does anybody need level-locked, colour-coded items and if so they deserve a nice kick in the ass.

In the end I replay the BGs a lot because I'm pretty much an OCD and need those shiny items with kewl backstories that I never care to read, POE's itemisation was nothing short of an insult, I don't know about Twitcher but I highly doubt Kingmaker will get itemisation right. Fingers crossed.
it is identical to Pillars, up to you if it is a good thing or not.
 

Theldaran

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 10, 2015
Messages
1,772
Maybe BG's items were hard to compare but even as an adolescent I knew which were better, also I had some notions of D&D. Does anybody need level-locked, colour-coded items and if so they deserve a nice kick in the ass.

In the end I replay the BGs a lot because I'm pretty much an OCD and need those shiny items with kewl backstories that I never care to read, POE's itemisation was nothing short of an insult, I don't know about Twitcher but I highly doubt Kingmaker will get itemisation right. Fingers crossed.
it is identical to Pillars, up to you if it is a good thing or not.

I want my sentient sword goddammit.
 

evdk

comrade troglodyte :M
Patron
Joined
Mar 31, 2004
Messages
11,292
Location
Corona regni Bohemiae
Codex 2012 Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Maybe BG's items were hard to compare but even as an adolescent I knew which were better, also I had some notions of D&D. Does anybody need level-locked, colour-coded items and if so they deserve a nice kick in the ass.

In the end I replay the BGs a lot because I'm pretty much an OCD and need those shiny items with kewl backstories that I never care to read, POE's itemisation was nothing short of an insult, I don't know about Twitcher but I highly doubt Kingmaker will get itemisation right. Fingers crossed.
it is identical to Pillars, up to you if it is a good thing or not.

I want my sentient sword goddammit.
That's in Pillars 2.
 

Master

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 19, 2016
Messages
1,160
How are they alike? Isnt Bioware's formula:
You have four, five places(planetes, cities) and you can visit them in any order. Some chatacters (you choose which) follow you around and you can command them and level them up.
CDPR games are so far either completely linear or open world(TW1 and TW3 respectively). I haven't played TW2. But in all 3 you lead just Geralt and even though there are some recurring characters they just hang around and you cant command them.
 

sullynathan

Arcane
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
6,473
Location
Not Europe
How are they alike? Isnt Bioware's formula:
You have four, five places(planetes, cities) and you can visit them in any order. Some chatacters (you choose which) follow you around and you can command them and level them up.
CDPR games are so far either completely linear or open world(TW1 and TW3 respectively). I haven't played TW2. But in all 3 you lead just Geralt and even though there are some recurring characters they just hang around and you cant command them.
So single character vs party rpg. Someone already mentioned that
 

cruelio

Savant
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
369
Walk around, watch cutscene and get quest, walk around, fight through boredom as you finish combat encounter, come back to questgiver, watch cutscene, rinse & repeat. Even the macrostructure and its evolution is similar, go through different chapter moving you from isolated location to location OMG OBLIVION 5:SKYRIM, FROM THE FALLOUT SERIES SOLD MILLION'S GONNA GO OPEN WORLD.

Nu-Bioware and CDPR games are virtually identical, the only difference is that workhour of a programmer costs 20 times less in Warsaw than it does in whatever hellhole Bioware crawled from so they have the ability to put more work into their product per dollar, leading to more polished experience. Experience of smearing shit all over your facade, except one piece of shit has lots of rough edges and the other is smooth.

Hmm... something is telling me this guy is a dumbfuck.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,660
How are they alike? Isnt Bioware's formula:
You have four, five places(planetes, cities) and you can visit them in any order. Some chatacters (you choose which) follow you around and you can command them and level them up.
Bioware broke that particular formula with Mass Effect 2 and hasn't gone back to it since.
 

Eyestabber

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
4,733
Location
HUEland
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015
How are they alike? Isnt Bioware's formula:
You have four, five places(planetes, cities) and you can visit them in any order. Some chatacters (you choose which) follow you around and you can command them and level them up.
Bioware broke that particular formula with Mass Effect 2 and hasn't gone back to it since.

How so? ME2 has a bunch of missions you can do in any order with tons of merely cosmetic C&C that will never impact another mission in any way. How is that "breaking from the formula"?
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,660
How so? ME2 has a bunch of missions you can do in any order with tons of merely cosmetic C&C that will never impact another mission in any way. How is that "breaking from the formula"?
It didn't use the hubs.
 

ScrotumBroth

Arcane
Patron
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
1,288
Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here Strap Yourselves In
I will try, but as a wise poster once said:



I picked this quote because it illustrates an important point: even if we can all agree Bioware spearheaded a change in the cRPG genre during the early 00's, the mid nighties were already a big departure from the "Golden Age" of cRPGs. Meaning Bioware didn't single handedly change the entire genre, but rather pushed it into a specific, commercially successful, direction. Judging the strength of this push is REALLY hard for people with no memory of the landscape before Bioware was even founded.

As a 30 y/o dude who got into cRPGs with Baldur's Gate (and later Fallout), it's a bit of a daunting task for me to specifically define "the Bioware formula" because I may not perceive the contrast as well as older members who were into the hobby even before Fallout. What I might call "Bioware formula" others might point and say "no, this is just mid-90s standard practice". I do feel, however, like I can comment on how Bioware took a step further from its contemporaries that resulted in "pleb Bioware" becoming rich while "prestigious Troika" went under. IMHO the most important aspects of the formula are:

- Lots of choices with little consequences: the savvy designers at Bioware noticed that "kids these days" love to have freduuums, but hate the consequences of making bad choices with said freedoms. How does that translate into RPGs? Ask lots and lots of questions to the player while making sure he is not going to miss anything or be punished in any way. Bioware mastered the art of working for a really incompetent boss. Always ask for his input, but make sure your questions are phrased in a way that won't ever result in redoing all the work. Take Kotor for instance. You might become the new Dark Lord of the Sith OR you might be The Awesome Jedi Who Saved The Galaxy Forever, depending on your choices. But you still visit the same place, fight the same enemies and the same final boss. Only a couple of voice tracks and cutscenes had to be redone. Now try to estimate how much time and money were saved in development because of that decision. The "Biowarean Choice" was a breakthrough that allowed their execs to please an entire generation of kids who "love" freeedom (except not really) while saving some SERIOUS shekels in the process.

Another thing: psychology has shown (I won't bother debating this point, if you don't agree, fine) that people get MUCH sadder with what's taken from them as opposed to happiness they feel over gaining something. In RPG terms, that means real C&C with mutually exclusive choices is a net negative for most people. AoD implemented real choices that result in a vastly different, branching storyline. Sounds great in theory, but in reality that means you can't be in all factions at once. The average player doesn't feel happy about the fact that "choosing X means I get to see Y cool thingie", nope. The average player immediately goes "WHY CAN'T I JOIN THE THIEVES GUILD AFTER BURNING THEIR GUILDHOUSE TO THE GROUND, REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE". While some people might enjoy this, the majority don't. That might be news for you, but it's definitely not news for Bioware. Their games let you choose which planet you visit first, but don't worry, all the quests will be there waiting for you and no choice you make will ever lead to a feeling of lost opportunity.

- Blatant pandering via NPCs:
Npcs are a major aspect of the Bioware Formula and their interaction with the PC is very important for delivering the "emoshunal experience" fans came to expect from BW games. Now, I don't know why these archetypes worked so incredibly well, I just know for sure they did. I'm guessing some really high level voodoo psychology was at play when they decided that every single game would have:

- A little sister/brother NPC that is a bit of a scoundrel, but is actually very caring and well meaning. Imoen -> Mission Val -> Joker -> Oghren
- A whiny male character that constantly bitches and moans whenever you say "time to die, bugface!", trying to push you towards the Light Side in the most passive aggressive manner possible. Khalid -> Carth Onasi -> Kaidan Alenko/Jacob (because even if you kill Alenko, can't have a BW game without a beta male nagging you) -> Alistair
- A REALLY bossy female character that thinks she is the one in charge BUT if you put up with her shit long enough she rewards you with some pussy. Jaheira -> Bastila -> Miranda Lawson -> Morrigan
- A big brother NPC who is a badass, gives zero fucks and (for some unfathomable reason) DOES NOT bully you after school. Minsc -> Canderous -> Garrus -> Sten
- (Minor, not featured in every game) Really sweet girl who was a victim of circumstance, misjudged by society but finds in the PC the loving, caring and understanding protector she so desperately needs. Viconia/Aerie -> Chief Williams/Tali -> Lelianna
- (Minor) Father figure. Gorion -> Captain Anderson -> Duncan/Wynn
- Le funneh edgy emo evil NPC companion: Edwin -> HK47 -> Mordin Solus -> Morrigan (2 for one, saving up on the VA budget)

I probably missed some, but the point stands: every BW game features these archetypes AND their presence allows for fantasy versions of really highschool-tier interactions in their games. BW games will always let you bail your little brother/sister out of trouble (rescue Imoen, Mission comes to Revan in tears begging for help in rescuing her friend etc), help your bitchtits friend in his quest to (maybe) become less of a bitch (convince Alistar to become King/convince Carth not everyone is like Admiral Karath), help your future GF deal with her family issues (or literal daddy issues in Miranda's case) and so on. All these interactions are nothing but teenager drama shit dressed up in a high fantasy setting. Now, compare that to the kind of interactions TNO has with the world of PS:T or what the VD has with the world of Fallout. It's not the same thing, is it?

- The world actually DOES revolve around the player: Nobody enjoys playing a supporting character that is just there to help someone else fulfill his destiny. Even the unwashed masses criticized Oblivion for the fact that le-chosen-one is actually Martim. You're just his bitchboy/bodyguard. Since nu-Bethesda loves money, they DID learn their lesson and made it sure that on their next game the player is the fucking Dragonborn-Chosen-One who saves the entire fucking universe while everyone else is a bitch, one quicksave away from being murdered for teh lulz. In other words: they realized The Bioware formula was superior to their own, and just straight up copied a portion of it, which resulted in EVEN MORE money.

There is obviously nothing wrong with making the player the protagonist of his own story, but the BW formula demands that the player becomes
directly responsible for drastically shaping the world without any form of reasonable limitation to his awesome power. From the very start it's made clear that the PC is special and meant for great things. Modest ambitions like what you see in Expeditions Vikings (turn the table on a more powerful noble and establish my clan as one of the big boys) are COMPLETELY off the table. You have to kill an ancient demon that OH SO FUCKING COINCIDENCE!!111 can only be killed by you and like 2 other guys. But one was jumping on a Dragon's back and died, and asking your friend alistair to kill himself is a REALLY socially awkward situation we best avoid. Alternatively, you need to stop the motherfucking Dark Lord of the Sith from ruling the Galaxy and destroying the Jedi forever. He is also your former apprentice, btw. Because you're so awesome you were ALREADY shaping the world of the game even before you started playing it!!!

When people use the term "power fantasy" they usually refer to the brain dead combat (next point), but this point is ALSO about power. Long before Obama started campaigning, Bioware already knew their customers wanted the power to CHANGE and said power was given to them. Even if, in the end, it doesn't actually change much other than a cutscene here and there. But, like, whatever ALL HAIL LORD REVAN!!!!!!!! xD xD XD

- The player doesn't fail. Only YOU fail for letting him fail: Even if BG2 had (arguably) a modicum of challenge, despite houserulling AD&D to make it less punishing, every single BW game after that had zero fucking challenge. Combat is balanced around a mentally retarded player with absolutely no idea of WTF he is doing (in other words, the average game journo), which is why anyone who has at least a CLUE as to what he is doing ends up breezing though every game without ever having to change tactics/reconsider their decisions. Sawyerism took this a little further by desiging an entire fucking new system where all your build choices only make you 5-20% more/less effective, thus making character progression choices merely cosmetic (I wrote about this on some other thread, too tired to look it up). In early BW games your build actually does matter, but everything is balanced around making sure the game is always beatable, no matter how hard you fuck things up. "Fail State/Fucked up campaign" is a cardinal sin against the BW formula (and against making money with gaymes in general), which is why later games made respec a staple. Because...what if some mouthbreather fails to realize "Two Handed, Sword & Shield, Bow and Dual Wielding" are actually * gasp * mutually exclusive perk trees and investing a point in each one every level isn't exactly optimal? What then!? Can this awesome person be DENIED of his god given right to keep winning until the final boss lies dead at his/her/its feet? OF COURSE NOT! So respecs are added just to be sure.

Boy, I still remember that patch that nerfed the tower Ogre in DA:O because retards couldn't beat him on normal difficulty.

- No blanks to be filled/no ambiguity: the characters and the plot of a BW game is very straightforward, meticulously explained and VERY "in your face". Some things might make ZERO sense, but you'll never be able to claim that the game never bothered EXPLAINING them to you. It's all very simple: your character is awesome and the people who oppose him are assholes who want to fuck shit up because HUE HUE HUE. Nothing is left up for debate. Your enemies will NEVER see something that you don't (unless it's made it obvious from the beginning, and you'll have a chance to ally with them -> The Architect) or have a justifiable reason for opposing you (unless you choose to go evil, in which case they die for teh lulz). Every plot related question can always be answered with "because PC is awesome" and "because villain is an asshole". Irenicus never got over his ex, Malak is a power-hungry twat, Yoshimo betrays you because Irenicus had his daughter hostage, Loghain wanted to usurp the throne and so on. There is never a real dilemma other than "should I save these people or kill them for teh lulz?"

I absolutely loved how Blackguards has you
chasing after a "villain" that turns out to be 100% on the right (Lysander) while your cunt of a "friend" is manipulating you into murdering your REAL best friend. Shame the game is made by Germans, which means you have no option to immediately IMPALE that bitch the moment your find out the truth because wahmen can do no wrong in the mind of the average eurocuck.
. Absolutely no such thing will ever be featured in a BW game because it makes the player doubt the awesomeness of his character and his group while also doubting the assholeness of his enemies. Featuring grey areas and dilemas also doesn't sit well with a generation who think everyone who disagrees with their own personal brand of "Perfect World Ideology" is literally Hitler.


Anyway, that's enough for today, I'm going to bed. Hope someone else chimes in.
It did, and even tho I never played DAI or Andromeda (I dropped bioware after DA2/ME2) I think I know why. Witcher 3 is a much superior implementation of the Bioware Formula than either of those two games. I would even argue that TW3 actually improved on the formula by adding some elements of its own (that were actually copied from other games). Let's see, I wonder if TW3 has...

- A cast of NPCs consisting of:



256



latest



latest


PERFECT execution on that one, btw. In case you didn't guess:
maxresdefault.jpg
Keira Metz fills that niche as well, because Merigold only shows up once you reach Novigrad. Can't let the player traverse Velen without a sweet-but-misunderstood-girl sidekick, now can we?

- Father figure. This one is fucking obvious:
latest
- Lastly, leh funneh edgy NPC is optional (Letto).

Two improvements on the formula that I noticed: (i) they were wise enough to make the "whiny beta male" a temporary companion, thus cutting your interactions with him to a minimum. He IS in the game, tho (Lambert). He just isn't around long enough for you to start ripping your hair in frustration at his constant whining. and (ii) there is a new character on the formula: your virtual daughter (Ciri). Having a virtual daughter around is apparently the new "cool" thing and has been proven to work in other games (Bioshock infinity and that faggy consolepleb game). The new God of War is experimenting with a virtual son. Let's see how that goes.

- A world that DOES revolve around the player:
Even if CDPR did their very best to deliver a credible world that feels alive and interesting, deep down it DOES revolve around the player. Geralt is Mr. Witcher badass, and wherever he goes everyone treats him like the fucking BOSS he is. NPCs are submissive, people in power will ALWAYS acknowledge you AND ofc you make "big choices that will forever change the world". Your virtual daughter literally saves the entire fucking universe with her magicool pussy powers AND your actions regarding whether or not you're gonna take the sidequest to murder a fucking KING determines the outcome of the entire fucking WAR.

- A design philosophy that prevents the player from ever failing:
Not only does TW3 makes it impossible for the player to fail, builds in the game clearly follow Sawyer's design philosophy. So, again, another improvement on the BW formula. You have 3 perk trees of mostly irrelevant shit that lets you do the exact same thing, but like 5% better. The game is completely beatable on maximum difficulty with a recently respec'ed character with 0 perks. Because the encounters are balanced around PASSIVE (level scaled) progression. D:OS2 shares this exact same trait. TW3 also features respecs, if you really feel like you NEED that 5% boost. The game also implemented level scaled + color coded itemization, same with D:OS2 and a sad new standard for RGPs in general. Because deciding between "+1 sword of awesome evil slaying (+1d6 dmg vs evil)" and "+2 sword of all aroundness" was simply too fucking hard. With a big "level" number and standarized color coding (notice how the color scheme is almost the same over multiple games?) we ensure retards won't EVER equip the wrong item EVER again!!!!


Only point where you could argue for the existence of some deviation from the formula. Essentially, they figured out their audience wasn't THAT stupid and could handle at least fedora-tier moral ambiguity ("both sides are bad, m'kay"). The main plot points, tho...nothing ambiguous about them. Geralt is awesome, King of the Hunt is a jerk, Mages dindu nothing (Novigrad line) and so on. Props on the Bloody Baron questline, but that questline filled all our "moral ambiguity" budget and it's time for a hail mary heroine (Ciri) to save the world against big baddie #3234353465. Again.

So, in conclusion: TW3 is a more-than-perfect execution of the Bioware Formula. The game DOES share a similarity with classic BW, there is no denying it. The keyword here is "similar". "Similarity" is a highly debated concept in philosophy, since it's includes both identity AND non-identity. You can't claim it's the same thing, but you can't claim it's completely different either. Because it's, welll...SIMILAR.

Lastly: notice how the formula, as I understand it, says NOTHING about how combat is supposed to play out or what camera angle is best? Because it doesn't really matter. I legit believe someone could make a "story driven FPS" following the BW formula to a T. Another sidenote: I feel like TW3 is more faithful to the formula than D:OS2. Larian is clearly trying to put their own spin on things. Yet I feel like if they ditch their cast of thinly veiled progressive stereotypes and replaced them with a BW+ cast of pandering NPCs, their next game will be able to reach Skyrim levels of sales. But's just my 2 cents.
Just wanted to say I really appreciate the effort and thought you've invested in these posts.

I think it's not a surprise nu-Bioware and nu-CDPR have a lot of similarities, after all, they've both grown massively and are now pandering to the console mass market.

But if we take a look at the beginning, BG1 and Witcher 1, those games actually beamed with potential and do not fit in the recipe you've described. BG1 is actually difficult, especially for retards who don't invest in learning the system. And Witcher 1 certainly did not aim at making players feel like a winner.
Both games have that special feel, extra effort was invested. They're finding themselves, while doing this new thing.

Then the bloat came, the pandering to retards, false C&C a la ME/DAO in W2/3, eyecandy easy combat in BG2 and everything else you've described. They've become nu-RPG devs pandering to nu-players who got off at 16 different endings marketing for TW2 and shit like that. Because that's where the shekels pour like wine.

Bioware of today doesn't even deserve the name, it's just another EA gimp passing feces within their dev centipede.

CDPR made it while keeping their freedom, so even though they follow the recipe, they throw enough quality production in the mix to make it enjoyable as a game, although far it be from an RPG.
 

Master

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 19, 2016
Messages
1,160
How are they alike? Isnt Bioware's formula:
You have four, five places(planetes, cities) and you can visit them in any order. Some chatacters (you choose which) follow you around and you can command them and level them up.
Bioware broke that particular formula with Mass Effect 2 and hasn't gone back to it since.
Right. I haven't played those.
How are they alike? Isnt Bioware's formula:
You have four, five places(planetes, cities) and you can visit them in any order. Some chatacters (you choose which) follow you around and you can command them and level them up.
Bioware broke that particular formula with Mass Effect 2 and hasn't gone back to it since.

How so? ME2 has a bunch of missions you can do in any order with tons of merely cosmetic C&C that will never impact another mission in any way. How is that "breaking from the formula"?
I think Eyestabber was being sarcastic here, but choosing the order of doing things is at least something. As long as its not open world.
 

Eyestabber

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
4,733
Location
HUEland
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015
BG1 and Witcher 1, those games actually beamed with potential and do not fit in the recipe you've described.

I mentioned BG2 and KOTOR because these are the games that consolidated the formula. Baldur's Gate was an early prototype and subsequent titles replicated BG2, not the original. As for the Witcher 1, I never claimed it had anything to do with the BW formula. TW3 does. CDPR started small and with a lot of originality, but eventually went for the tried and true route of making it big. It worked, didn't it?
 

Sceptic

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
10,871
Divinity: Original Sin
I picked this quote because it illustrates an important point: even if we can all agree Bioware spearheaded a change in the cRPG genre during the early 00's, the mid nighties were already a big departure from the "Golden Age" of cRPGs. Meaning Bioware didn't single handedly change the entire genre, but rather pushed it into a specific, commercially successful, direction. Judging the strength of this push is REALLY hard for people with no memory of the landscape before Bioware was even founded.
I agree with this, but I guess not really with the list of points you brought up (maybe I just misunderstood your post). Almost every one of the aspects you attribute to the Bioware Formula were there years before Bioware was even formed. NPC pandering is one of particular interest because if I had to pick two games that made party NPCs and interaction with them a major thing, I'd pick Stonekeep and Fallout, both of which predate Bioware RPGs. Even romances were there in Treasure of the Savage Frontier. Same with world revolving around the player, Scorpia would roll her eyes at cliche chosen one saves the world plots back in the 80s. "Easymode" RPGs (and your description specifically refers to combat mechanics) were a thing back in the 80s too - Origin had Bad Blood, Mindcraft had Rings of Zilfin, Ultima 4 was not a particularly difficult game when it came combat, and hey Fallout isn't exactly a contender for challenge either... Bioware's sin as far as I'm concerned wasn't coming up with any of these (besides none of these is necessarily bad), but the specific implementation ("teenage drama" is a good way to put it, as you did). Bioware Formula isn't about NPC pandering, but the specific way they write the NPCs and the fact the interaction is teen-level. Lack of consequences isn't necessarily a problem, but the way the choices are presented and the single consequence is forced out of them stands out (DAO was pretty bad about this in parts). Of course the world revolves around the player, 90% of games have this, but the ego stroking gets embarrassing.

Anyway like I said earlier I don't disagree with you, but I think the problems with the formula are more specific. It's also why I consider KOTOR to be the one to have cemented it, not the BGs, because that was the game that had NPCs forced on you with no way around them, that wouldn't let you deal with someone blocking your way by simply attacking them (can only start combat via dialogue!), and that managed to be so 2-dimensional good/evil it was too much even for a Star Wars game.
 
Unwanted

a Goat

Unwanted
Dumbfuck Edgy Vatnik
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
6,941
Location
Albania
Soon you fags will start telling me that Dark Shits clones are their own thin and totally not inspired by SROM software
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom