The Mass Effect 3/BioWare Thread

[Volourn]

" Even if they're repeating the EA message like a politician does his talking points they still at least passively agree since they continue to work there "

Plenty of people work at palces where they don'ty agree with the bosses' and owners' business plans. Your logic is stupid.


" isn't present in games that sell much better than theirs."

Which games are these?

 

[DalekFlay]

Plenty of people work at palces where they don'ty agree with the bosses' and owners' business plans. Your logic is stupid.

You left out the important second part: the current market allows them many other opportunities, if they wanted them.

 

[Volourn]

"You left out the important second part: the current market allows them many other opportunities, if they wanted them."

No. These positions don't grow on trees. Why leave when you have a pretty solid paying job for risky proposition? You are dumb.

If you try to claim that Gaider who has been with BIO since the beginning should just up and leave a job he has had for 10+ years - one that he is probably paid rather well for - and just up and leave it for some random studio who might or might not treat him respectfully just because he might not 100% agree with his boss's direction of the company is asanine, stupid, and retarted.

 

[Tytus]

According to Bioware, the "canon story" for Dragon Age: Origins is that the Warden is of Dalish Elf origin (no gender mentioned}, the Warden sacrifices themselves to kill the Archdemon (no God-baby with Morrigan} and Alistair becomes King. No mention of what kind of class/gender the new Orlesian Warden from Awakening is.

Source:
https://twitter.com/BioMarkDarrah/status/364864515717873665

So after all these years of saying the player makes the canon the just gave up? They should rediscover their balls and do it more often. Give players the choice during the game but set one canon ending for every game. The story will be more focused that way. And we won't end up with color swapped endings.

Though I find especially funny that the writers got rid of the demon baby. They wrote themselves into a corner and didn't know what to do with it? Why even give such powerful choice of creating - essentially - a god. When you won't do anything with it? I still like the fact that maybe now they will finally stop being such pussies while writing their games (doubtfully) but I still have to question their decision of what they actually chose.

 

[Commissar Draco]

Wait My Dwarven Gray Warden a faggot Elf? Biowhore

 

[Tytus]

in before biodrones replaying the game in the canon way

 

[Delterius]

in before biodrones replaying the game in the canon way

And chastising everyone else for playing the game wrong. Literally. I've seen this happening multiple times. Whenever someone complains/wonders wether a choice will be contemplated, there are people who'll act smug that they chose the 'correct' choice and that the games fit 'their' story.

Though I'm pretty sure this 'canon' deal is only valid for the Expanded Universe (comics, etc). Gamewise they'll still try to accommodate multiple protagonist.

Still makes you wonder why the comics and books are used to expand the main characters instead of fleshing out the setting's history. I think they should make a comic about something far away from the main plot, with new characters who may later be incorporated into the main quest.

 

[eremita]

in before biodrones replaying the game in the canon way

And chastising everyone else for playing the game wrong. Literally. I've seen this happening multiple times. Whenever someone complains/wonders wether a choice will be contemplated, there are people who'll act smug that they chose the 'correct' choice and that the games fit 'their' story.

Though I'm pretty sure this 'canon' deal is only valid for the Expanded Universe (comics, etc). Gamewise they'll still try to accommodate multiple protagonist.

Still makes you wonder why the comics and books are used to expand the main characters instead of fleshing out the setting's history. I think they should make a comic about something far away from the main plot, with new characters who may later be incorporated into the main quest.

I don't really have a problem with that. It's not like those comics and books are about "you" (Warden, Hawke). (As far as I now, I never read any of those.) NPC are not entirely in your hands, they have their minds and ultimately their own stories.

I also don't give a fuck about canon as long as I can play my game the way I want...

 

[Delterius]

You misunderstand. The issue clearly isn't about the protagonists themselves, but rather how the NPCs are handled. An example is how Alistair's crowning is 'canon' and treated as such by the comics. Meaning that these stories, though not necessarily of limited appeal, don't really match the entire fanbase's experience with the setting. This situation isn't that bad but it sure isn't ideal either.

Which is why I think that they should do things like Blizzard does, writing comics and books that serve as cue for new games. Dealing with places and times beyond the games' storylines. Such as a Tevinter story with entirely new characters just prior to a DA that deals with the ongoing Tevinter/Qunari war. You know, like the prequel book to DA:O deals with Loghain and Maric.

Another idea that might be interesting is to deal with existing characters through a CYOA adventure. As long as the story is somewhat self contained, you should be able to observe the post game life of certain 'fan favourites' from every angle.

 

[Space Satan]

Gayder wrote on bsn that there will be no canon and comics were made just to milk retards for money. I can blame him for million of things but here biowhore, maybe accidently, made the right decision. Let idiots buy comics, books and other shit and keep it separate from the game.

 

[LivingOne]

bsn is p.boring these days but they have this token David Cage fanboy:

Visual part is very important. It makes the characters and the world alive.

Spoiler

Seival wrote...

DA:I is going to be a good next-gen game. So, let's not judge the game by pre-alfa based videos, and hope for the following things in release:

- Best possible facial motion capture for all facial expressions and talking.
- Best possible gestures/move/attack motion capture, and as many variants of all of that as possible.
- Best possible motion captured sequences for all dialogue scenes and cut-scenes.

In a next-gen game characters shouldn't look like or act like a dolls. A lot of good actors' work can make them truly alive.

I'm not talking about turning DA:I into an interactive movie. But visual quality of the same level as in The Last of Us, for example, is simply required for a next-gen game. Even if it's an RPG with much larger amount of dialogues and cutscenes.

Seival wrote...

They can decrease the planned amount of cut-scenes and dialogues to make the rest look much better. It's not too late yet. They are still on the early stage of development.

You have got to be joking.

I'd rather be happy with a 10-hours long heavily story-driven game with the best possible visual part and story, and without too much gameplay, than with a 50-hours long story-driven game with excess side quests, really short main plot, and gameplay that requires too large amount of doing the same thing over and over again.

You can control and speak for your character for 5 hours with great level of execution of cutscenes and dialogues, or you can control and speak for your character for 20 hours with poor execution level of cutscenes and dialogues. Personally, I prefer 5 hours with great level of execution. And this will still be an RPG.

Try playing text RPGs then. You will definitely find them much more entertaining than even old school RPGs like Planescape. No visual part at all - just text. Also, check out some low-budget RPG kickstarters, you might find them very interesting. But please, don't expect BioWare to return to oldschool even a little. DA:I will obviously be a AAA modern game, not a DA:O or Baldur's Gate revamp.

I'm blind because I find visual part very important? On the contrary - you are blind, because you can't see the visual part, and how important it is. Only professional actors' work will make you truly feel what characters on the screen feel, and VOs are not enough for that. Low-poly dolls with primitive animations will naver provide truly strong emotional connection with game characters.

Ideas used in a story and its scenario are very important indeed, and how good and professional the ideas/scenario are shown is equally important. I can't take a story in a game seriously enough, if I don't see the story as professional in all terms performance. No scripted doll will ever make a character truly realistic and living. Only professional actor can do that with her/his voice, motion, and facial expressions. That's why motion capture is required to create truly story driven games.

I don't worry about models and textures here. I worry mostly about at what capacity and quality motion capture and professional actors' work will be used.

EntropicAngel wrote...

Seival wrote...

But please, don't expect BioWare to return to oldschool even a little. DA:I will obviously be a AAA modern game, not a DA:O or Baldur's Gate revamp.

Is that why Bioware has returned the tactical camera? Is that why Bioware removed level scaling? Is that why Bioware removed total health regen?

I'm not sure you know the game you're talking about.

You listed the features that any game can use.

Remember Me, for example:
- Health isn't regenerating automatically, so you have to use your skills to keep your character alive.
- Your character isn't becoming overpowered while progressing through the game.
- You can place game on "pause" to open the abilities menu and think about current combat situation to figure out what should you do next.

And Remember Me is a great modern AAA heavily story-driven game, not some old-school boredom.

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

Seival wrote...
Low-poly dolls with primitive animations will naver provide truly strong emotional connection with game characters.

Baldur's Gate, Final Fantasy 1 to 7, and the list go on...

The list of games that look like a joke by modern standards. Don't get me wrong, I was a fan of games like Planescape: Torment and Baldur's Gate. But that was long ago. Now these old games can cause nothing but a silly smile. They are too old and outdated on all possible levels.

Feeling a game's story is not less important than seeing, hearing, and playing it. I feel almost nothing while looking at and listening to the scripted dolls. VOs and texts are not enough. Actual actors work is what makes the game and its story truly alive for me.

I see real actors work in modern AAA story-driven games. In cut scenes. In dialogues. In fully motion captured scenes and sequences. This makes me feel what they feel. What their characters feel. This makes the stories truly deep and exciting. This makes something that none of old-school games can make.

Any game that has RPG elements can be called RPG. Don't argue about that, please. This is not just an assumption. Ask any game developer if you don't believe me.

If you really prefer resources to go towards the story and characters then you should be on my side, actually. Let's look back at DA:O and DA2 characters. How exactly are they formed? What make them look like people? Skills? Gear? Statistics on how many rats did they kill on your playthrough? No, only dialogues, cutscenes, and VOs make them what they are. And the point is that quantity of dialogues and cut scenes doesn't determine characters' quality.

In DA:O and DA2 only VOs were made really good, and the characters were nothing more but talking dolls.

Try to play Beyond: Two Souls, and see the difference. With 5 times less amount of gameplay you will have 100 times deeper connection to the characters, because they are played by professional actors, who were fully motion captured and scanned by state of art equipment. The characters are alive. The little amount of interactive dialogues in Beyond have much more meaning than all dialogues from DA:O and DA2 combined, because you can really feel the characters' emotions.

Beyond has the same RPG elements as Mass Effect, for example. You play a role by choosing dialogue options, and which way the story will be told, what exactly will your charater do in the key moments of the story. Beyond can be called RPG game. And in fact, I like roleplaying Jodie much more than roleplaying Shepard, Warden or Hawke... But I'm not suggesting to turn DA:I into interactive movie here. I'm suggesting to get rid of plans to make a lot of excess things like side quests, unneeded lines in dialogues, and some unneeded skills/gear/features to make dialogues/cutscenes which are only very important for main plot and characters really good by modern standards. That will require a lot of actors work and motion capture.

So, you believe that some exact gameplay features form the oldschool? By your logic, Beyond and TWD are the oldschool games then. They both have some very old gameplay features in their basis. Remember Phantasmagoria game? Bioforge? Old quests? Sounds familiar?

Gameplay features do not determine if the game will be oldschool or not. Ability and desire of devs to make the game modern do. Ability and desire to use modern technologies in each and every aspect of the game.

...And let's look at this from little different perspective. Why do you think PCs, Consoles, Tablets, and Smartphones become more and more advanced? Mostly because of creative people have unbreakable desire to make state of art media products, and society that gladly pays for such products. A desire to create and play more realistic in all terms games literally pushes the modern technologies forwards. And all this "old-school-is-the-only-way" conservatism is nothing more but the love of stagnation and decay. So, let game developers and games do the very important job both in our minds and real life. Don't try to delay them with old-school nonsense.

Here is the definition of RPG game:

"A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development. Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines."

So, basically, any game that has a least one role playing feature is an RPG. RPG game doesn't have to have all or most possible RPG elements.

By the way, Beyond: Two Souls game has two (!) RPG elements, but somehow most people don't call it RPG game. This isn't fair, while the same people are calling Diablo III with only one such feature an RPG game.

Jozape wrote...

Seival wrote...

...And let's look at this from little different perspective. Why do you think PCs, Consoles, Tablets, and Smartphones become more and more advanced? Mostly because of creative people have unbreakable desire to make state of art media products, and society that gladly pays for such products. A desire to create and play more realistic in all terms games literally pushes the modern technologies forwards. And all this "old-school-is-the-only-way" conservatism is nothing more but the love of stagnation and decay. So, let game developers and games do the very important job both in our minds and real life.

The technological demands help drive the demand for more powerful computers, but they are hardly the main reason for any part besides the graphics processing unit. Servers and workstations need that power too. Even our desktops with our bloated Microsoft operating systems can benefit from the extra juice.

And having Dragon Age not focus on the bleeding edge of technology will not do much to hinder the march of technology. There are plenty of games out there pushing the boundary, like Killzone and whatever shiny games kids play these days.

Disagree. You are dramatically underestimating the influence of game development on technological advancement.

By the way. I'm playing Killzone: Shadowfall on my PS4 now, and the game already looks much more story driven than all released Dragon Ages combined. Just because the characters look really alive.

 

[Caim]

But if graphics = emotions then FMV games are the most emotionally engaging games ever.

Phantasmagoria 2, Ripper, that one X-Files game that came on seven CDs; all classics for the ages.

 

[Jick Magger]

Hey now, Ripper wasn't that bad.

Least not bad enough to be mentioned in the same sentence as Phantasmagoria 2 and those FMV X-Files games.

 

[Kem0sabe]

bsn is p.boring these days but they have this token David Cage fanboy:

Visual part is very important. It makes the characters and the world alive.

Spoiler

Seival wrote...

DA:I is going to be a good next-gen game. So, let's not judge the game by pre-alfa based videos, and hope for the following things in release:

- Best possible facial motion capture for all facial expressions and talking.
- Best possible gestures/move/attack motion capture, and as many variants of all of that as possible.
- Best possible motion captured sequences for all dialogue scenes and cut-scenes.

In a next-gen game characters shouldn't look like or act like a dolls. A lot of good actors' work can make them truly alive.

I'm not talking about turning DA:I into an interactive movie. But visual quality of the same level as in The Last of Us, for example, is simply required for a next-gen game. Even if it's an RPG with much larger amount of dialogues and cutscenes.

Seival wrote...

They can decrease the planned amount of cut-scenes and dialogues to make the rest look much better. It's not too late yet. They are still on the early stage of development.

You have got to be joking.

I'd rather be happy with a 10-hours long heavily story-driven game with the best possible visual part and story, and without too much gameplay, than with a 50-hours long story-driven game with excess side quests, really short main plot, and gameplay that requires too large amount of doing the same thing over and over again.

You can control and speak for your character for 5 hours with great level of execution of cutscenes and dialogues, or you can control and speak for your character for 20 hours with poor execution level of cutscenes and dialogues. Personally, I prefer 5 hours with great level of execution. And this will still be an RPG.

Try playing text RPGs then. You will definitely find them much more entertaining than even old school RPGs like Planescape. No visual part at all - just text. Also, check out some low-budget RPG kickstarters, you might find them very interesting. But please, don't expect BioWare to return to oldschool even a little. DA:I will obviously be a AAA modern game, not a DA:O or Baldur's Gate revamp.

I'm blind because I find visual part very important? On the contrary - you are blind, because you can't see the visual part, and how important it is. Only professional actors' work will make you truly feel what characters on the screen feel, and VOs are not enough for that. Low-poly dolls with primitive animations will naver provide truly strong emotional connection with game characters.

Ideas used in a story and its scenario are very important indeed, and how good and professional the ideas/scenario are shown is equally important. I can't take a story in a game seriously enough, if I don't see the story as professional in all terms performance. No scripted doll will ever make a character truly realistic and living. Only professional actor can do that with her/his voice, motion, and facial expressions. That's why motion capture is required to create truly story driven games.

I don't worry about models and textures here. I worry mostly about at what capacity and quality motion capture and professional actors' work will be used.

EntropicAngel wrote...

Seival wrote...

But please, don't expect BioWare to return to oldschool even a little. DA:I will obviously be a AAA modern game, not a DA:O or Baldur's Gate revamp.

Is that why Bioware has returned the tactical camera? Is that why Bioware removed level scaling? Is that why Bioware removed total health regen?

I'm not sure you know the game you're talking about.

You listed the features that any game can use.

Remember Me, for example:
- Health isn't regenerating automatically, so you have to use your skills to keep your character alive.
- Your character isn't becoming overpowered while progressing through the game.
- You can place game on "pause" to open the abilities menu and think about current combat situation to figure out what should you do next.

And Remember Me is a great modern AAA heavily story-driven game, not some old-school boredom.

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

Seival wrote...
Low-poly dolls with primitive animations will naver provide truly strong emotional connection with game characters.

Baldur's Gate, Final Fantasy 1 to 7, and the list go on...

The list of games that look like a joke by modern standards. Don't get me wrong, I was a fan of games like Planescape: Torment and Baldur's Gate. But that was long ago. Now these old games can cause nothing but a silly smile. They are too old and outdated on all possible levels.

Feeling a game's story is not less important than seeing, hearing, and playing it. I feel almost nothing while looking at and listening to the scripted dolls. VOs and texts are not enough. Actual actors work is what makes the game and its story truly alive for me.

I see real actors work in modern AAA story-driven games. In cut scenes. In dialogues. In fully motion captured scenes and sequences. This makes me feel what they feel. What their characters feel. This makes the stories truly deep and exciting. This makes something that none of old-school games can make.

Any game that has RPG elements can be called RPG. Don't argue about that, please. This is not just an assumption. Ask any game developer if you don't believe me.

If you really prefer resources to go towards the story and characters then you should be on my side, actually. Let's look back at DA:O and DA2 characters. How exactly are they formed? What make them look like people? Skills? Gear? Statistics on how many rats did they kill on your playthrough? No, only dialogues, cutscenes, and VOs make them what they are. And the point is that quantity of dialogues and cut scenes doesn't determine characters' quality.

In DA:O and DA2 only VOs were made really good, and the characters were nothing more but talking dolls.

Try to play Beyond: Two Souls, and see the difference. With 5 times less amount of gameplay you will have 100 times deeper connection to the characters, because they are played by professional actors, who were fully motion captured and scanned by state of art equipment. The characters are alive. The little amount of interactive dialogues in Beyond have much more meaning than all dialogues from DA:O and DA2 combined, because you can really feel the characters' emotions.

Beyond has the same RPG elements as Mass Effect, for example. You play a role by choosing dialogue options, and which way the story will be told, what exactly will your charater do in the key moments of the story. Beyond can be called RPG game. And in fact, I like roleplaying Jodie much more than roleplaying Shepard, Warden or Hawke... But I'm not suggesting to turn DA:I into interactive movie here. I'm suggesting to get rid of plans to make a lot of excess things like side quests, unneeded lines in dialogues, and some unneeded skills/gear/features to make dialogues/cutscenes which are only very important for main plot and characters really good by modern standards. That will require a lot of actors work and motion capture.

So, you believe that some exact gameplay features form the oldschool? By your logic, Beyond and TWD are the oldschool games then. They both have some very old gameplay features in their basis. Remember Phantasmagoria game? Bioforge? Old quests? Sounds familiar?

Gameplay features do not determine if the game will be oldschool or not. Ability and desire of devs to make the game modern do. Ability and desire to use modern technologies in each and every aspect of the game.

...And let's look at this from little different perspective. Why do you think PCs, Consoles, Tablets, and Smartphones become more and more advanced? Mostly because of creative people have unbreakable desire to make state of art media products, and society that gladly pays for such products. A desire to create and play more realistic in all terms games literally pushes the modern technologies forwards. And all this "old-school-is-the-only-way" conservatism is nothing more but the love of stagnation and decay. So, let game developers and games do the very important job both in our minds and real life. Don't try to delay them with old-school nonsense.

Here is the definition of RPG game:

"A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development. Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines."

So, basically, any game that has a least one role playing feature is an RPG. RPG game doesn't have to have all or most possible RPG elements.

By the way, Beyond: Two Souls game has two (!) RPG elements, but somehow most people don't call it RPG game. This isn't fair, while the same people are calling Diablo III with only one such feature an RPG game.

Jozape wrote...

Seival wrote...

...And let's look at this from little different perspective. Why do you think PCs, Consoles, Tablets, and Smartphones become more and more advanced? Mostly because of creative people have unbreakable desire to make state of art media products, and society that gladly pays for such products. A desire to create and play more realistic in all terms games literally pushes the modern technologies forwards. And all this "old-school-is-the-only-way" conservatism is nothing more but the love of stagnation and decay. So, let game developers and games do the very important job both in our minds and real life.

The technological demands help drive the demand for more powerful computers, but they are hardly the main reason for any part besides the graphics processing unit. Servers and workstations need that power too. Even our desktops with our bloated Microsoft operating systems can benefit from the extra juice.

And having Dragon Age not focus on the bleeding edge of technology will not do much to hinder the march of technology. There are plenty of games out there pushing the boundary, like Killzone and whatever shiny games kids play these days.

Disagree. You are dramatically underestimating the influence of game development on technological advancement.

By the way. I'm playing Killzone: Shadowfall on my PS4 now, and the game already looks much more story driven than all released Dragon Ages combined. Just because the characters look really alive.

 

[Space Satan]

bsn is p.boring these days but they have this token David Cage fanboy:

Visual part is very important. It makes the characters and the world alive.

Spoiler

Seival wrote...

DA:I is going to be a good next-gen game. So, let's not judge the game by pre-alfa based videos, and hope for the following things in release:

- Best possible facial motion capture for all facial expressions and talking.
- Best possible gestures/move/attack motion capture, and as many variants of all of that as possible.
- Best possible motion captured sequences for all dialogue scenes and cut-scenes.

In a next-gen game characters shouldn't look like or act like a dolls. A lot of good actors' work can make them truly alive.

I'm not talking about turning DA:I into an interactive movie. But visual quality of the same level as in The Last of Us, for example, is simply required for a next-gen game. Even if it's an RPG with much larger amount of dialogues and cutscenes.

Seival wrote...

They can decrease the planned amount of cut-scenes and dialogues to make the rest look much better. It's not too late yet. They are still on the early stage of development.

You have got to be joking.

I'd rather be happy with a 10-hours long heavily story-driven game with the best possible visual part and story, and without too much gameplay, than with a 50-hours long story-driven game with excess side quests, really short main plot, and gameplay that requires too large amount of doing the same thing over and over again.

You can control and speak for your character for 5 hours with great level of execution of cutscenes and dialogues, or you can control and speak for your character for 20 hours with poor execution level of cutscenes and dialogues. Personally, I prefer 5 hours with great level of execution. And this will still be an RPG.

Try playing text RPGs then. You will definitely find them much more entertaining than even old school RPGs like Planescape. No visual part at all - just text. Also, check out some low-budget RPG kickstarters, you might find them very interesting. But please, don't expect BioWare to return to oldschool even a little. DA:I will obviously be a AAA modern game, not a DA:O or Baldur's Gate revamp.

I'm blind because I find visual part very important? On the contrary - you are blind, because you can't see the visual part, and how important it is. Only professional actors' work will make you truly feel what characters on the screen feel, and VOs are not enough for that. Low-poly dolls with primitive animations will naver provide truly strong emotional connection with game characters.

Ideas used in a story and its scenario are very important indeed, and how good and professional the ideas/scenario are shown is equally important. I can't take a story in a game seriously enough, if I don't see the story as professional in all terms performance. No scripted doll will ever make a character truly realistic and living. Only professional actor can do that with her/his voice, motion, and facial expressions. That's why motion capture is required to create truly story driven games.

I don't worry about models and textures here. I worry mostly about at what capacity and quality motion capture and professional actors' work will be used.

EntropicAngel wrote...

Seival wrote...

But please, don't expect BioWare to return to oldschool even a little. DA:I will obviously be a AAA modern game, not a DA:O or Baldur's Gate revamp.

Is that why Bioware has returned the tactical camera? Is that why Bioware removed level scaling? Is that why Bioware removed total health regen?

I'm not sure you know the game you're talking about.

You listed the features that any game can use.

Remember Me, for example:
- Health isn't regenerating automatically, so you have to use your skills to keep your character alive.
- Your character isn't becoming overpowered while progressing through the game.
- You can place game on "pause" to open the abilities menu and think about current combat situation to figure out what should you do next.

And Remember Me is a great modern AAA heavily story-driven game, not some old-school boredom.

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

Seival wrote...
Low-poly dolls with primitive animations will naver provide truly strong emotional connection with game characters.

Baldur's Gate, Final Fantasy 1 to 7, and the list go on...

The list of games that look like a joke by modern standards. Don't get me wrong, I was a fan of games like Planescape: Torment and Baldur's Gate. But that was long ago. Now these old games can cause nothing but a silly smile. They are too old and outdated on all possible levels.

Feeling a game's story is not less important than seeing, hearing, and playing it. I feel almost nothing while looking at and listening to the scripted dolls. VOs and texts are not enough. Actual actors work is what makes the game and its story truly alive for me.

I see real actors work in modern AAA story-driven games. In cut scenes. In dialogues. In fully motion captured scenes and sequences. This makes me feel what they feel. What their characters feel. This makes the stories truly deep and exciting. This makes something that none of old-school games can make.

Any game that has RPG elements can be called RPG. Don't argue about that, please. This is not just an assumption. Ask any game developer if you don't believe me.

If you really prefer resources to go towards the story and characters then you should be on my side, actually. Let's look back at DA:O and DA2 characters. How exactly are they formed? What make them look like people? Skills? Gear? Statistics on how many rats did they kill on your playthrough? No, only dialogues, cutscenes, and VOs make them what they are. And the point is that quantity of dialogues and cut scenes doesn't determine characters' quality.

In DA:O and DA2 only VOs were made really good, and the characters were nothing more but talking dolls.

Try to play Beyond: Two Souls, and see the difference. With 5 times less amount of gameplay you will have 100 times deeper connection to the characters, because they are played by professional actors, who were fully motion captured and scanned by state of art equipment. The characters are alive. The little amount of interactive dialogues in Beyond have much more meaning than all dialogues from DA:O and DA2 combined, because you can really feel the characters' emotions.

Beyond has the same RPG elements as Mass Effect, for example. You play a role by choosing dialogue options, and which way the story will be told, what exactly will your charater do in the key moments of the story. Beyond can be called RPG game. And in fact, I like roleplaying Jodie much more than roleplaying Shepard, Warden or Hawke... But I'm not suggesting to turn DA:I into interactive movie here. I'm suggesting to get rid of plans to make a lot of excess things like side quests, unneeded lines in dialogues, and some unneeded skills/gear/features to make dialogues/cutscenes which are only very important for main plot and characters really good by modern standards. That will require a lot of actors work and motion capture.

So, you believe that some exact gameplay features form the oldschool? By your logic, Beyond and TWD are the oldschool games then. They both have some very old gameplay features in their basis. Remember Phantasmagoria game? Bioforge? Old quests? Sounds familiar?

Gameplay features do not determine if the game will be oldschool or not. Ability and desire of devs to make the game modern do. Ability and desire to use modern technologies in each and every aspect of the game.

...And let's look at this from little different perspective. Why do you think PCs, Consoles, Tablets, and Smartphones become more and more advanced? Mostly because of creative people have unbreakable desire to make state of art media products, and society that gladly pays for such products. A desire to create and play more realistic in all terms games literally pushes the modern technologies forwards. And all this "old-school-is-the-only-way" conservatism is nothing more but the love of stagnation and decay. So, let game developers and games do the very important job both in our minds and real life. Don't try to delay them with old-school nonsense.

Here is the definition of RPG game:

"A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development. Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines."

So, basically, any game that has a least one role playing feature is an RPG. RPG game doesn't have to have all or most possible RPG elements.

By the way, Beyond: Two Souls game has two (!) RPG elements, but somehow most people don't call it RPG game. This isn't fair, while the same people are calling Diablo III with only one such feature an RPG game.

Jozape wrote...

Seival wrote...

...And let's look at this from little different perspective. Why do you think PCs, Consoles, Tablets, and Smartphones become more and more advanced? Mostly because of creative people have unbreakable desire to make state of art media products, and society that gladly pays for such products. A desire to create and play more realistic in all terms games literally pushes the modern technologies forwards. And all this "old-school-is-the-only-way" conservatism is nothing more but the love of stagnation and decay. So, let game developers and games do the very important job both in our minds and real life.

The technological demands help drive the demand for more powerful computers, but they are hardly the main reason for any part besides the graphics processing unit. Servers and workstations need that power too. Even our desktops with our bloated Microsoft operating systems can benefit from the extra juice.

And having Dragon Age not focus on the bleeding edge of technology will not do much to hinder the march of technology. There are plenty of games out there pushing the boundary, like Killzone and whatever shiny games kids play these days.

Disagree. You are dramatically underestimating the influence of game development on technological advancement.

By the way. I'm playing Killzone: Shadowfall on my PS4 now, and the game already looks much more story driven than all released Dragon Ages combined. Just because the characters look really alive.

 

[Valestein]

It's very hard to tell whether or not Seival is a troll or a nutjob.

 

[Morning Star]

I've never played Mass Effect. I care about, in order: The Story, Choices and Consequences, The Combat, and then whatever’s left. Should I play this game?

 

[Lhynn]

I've never played Mass Effect. I care about, in order: The Story, Choices and Consequences, The Combat, and then whatever’s left. Should I play this game?

ME1: the story is decent, has its really good moments. combat is probably the shittiest in the series. C&C does change ending, but you make the calls at the very ending, so it dont count. characterization ranges from decent to awful, character creation/building is decent, could even be said it has some depth, whatever is left is kinda cool, except elevators.
ME2&3: story is weak and nonsensical, C&C is a lie, combat is shit, characterization ranges from decent to awful, character creation/building is weaksauce saywerism (especially on 3), and whatever is left is not enjoyable. and ME3 gives the biggest finger in the face to the player since system shock 2.
All in all the series sees a huge decline, 1 is good, 2 is retarded but fun, 3 is a total waste of time.

 

[Sunsetspawn]

It's very hard to tell whether or not Seival is a troll or a nutjob.

Troll. He (she, it?) is supporting EVERYTHING that's wrong with modern games and seems hopeful that Bioware will continue to push their games in that "AAA" direction. He went as far as to imply that merely choosing dialogue options makes a game an RPG... Well, fuck, isn't Halo an RPG because you're playing the "role" of Master Chief? You choose who to shoot first, right? Any person that really feels this way would just be content with the myriad of other "RPGs" he can play, like Goodfellas or Memento.

Also: the goofy english. Nothing really slams a good trolling home like slightly fucked-up english.

 

[donkeymong]

I'd pick to get rid of Mass Effect 2 and 3. Give them a do-over to try telling the story again.

Of course. But the multiplayer of 3 was actually entertaining.
By the way, both Fallout Vegas and Elder Scrolls easily outsold the last Bioware despite a not voiced MC. Not all hope is lost.

 

[Akratus]

I've never played Mass Effect. I care about, in order: The Story, Choices and Consequences, The Combat, and then whatever’s left. Should I play this game?

ME1: the story is decent, has its really good moments. combat is probably the shittiest in the series. C&C does change ending, but you make the calls at the very ending, so it dont count. characterization ranges from decent to awful, character creation/building is decent, could even be said it has some depth, whatever is left is kinda cool, except elevators.
ME2&3: story is weak and nonsensical, C&C is a lie, combat is shit, characterization ranges from decent to awful, character creation/building is weaksauce saywerism (especially on 3), and whatever is left is not enjoyable. and ME3 gives the biggest finger in the face to the player since system shock 2.
All in all the series sees a huge decline, 1 is good, 2 is retarded but fun, 3 is a total waste of time.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Xor]

bsn is p.boring these days but they have this token David Cage fanboy:

Visual part is very important. It makes the characters and the world alive.

Spoiler

Seival wrote...

DA:I is going to be a good next-gen game. So, let's not judge the game by pre-alfa based videos, and hope for the following things in release:

- Best possible facial motion capture for all facial expressions and talking.
- Best possible gestures/move/attack motion capture, and as many variants of all of that as possible.
- Best possible motion captured sequences for all dialogue scenes and cut-scenes.

In a next-gen game characters shouldn't look like or act like a dolls. A lot of good actors' work can make them truly alive.

I'm not talking about turning DA:I into an interactive movie. But visual quality of the same level as in The Last of Us, for example, is simply required for a next-gen game. Even if it's an RPG with much larger amount of dialogues and cutscenes.

Seival wrote...

They can decrease the planned amount of cut-scenes and dialogues to make the rest look much better. It's not too late yet. They are still on the early stage of development.

You have got to be joking.

I'd rather be happy with a 10-hours long heavily story-driven game with the best possible visual part and story, and without too much gameplay, than with a 50-hours long story-driven game with excess side quests, really short main plot, and gameplay that requires too large amount of doing the same thing over and over again.

You can control and speak for your character for 5 hours with great level of execution of cutscenes and dialogues, or you can control and speak for your character for 20 hours with poor execution level of cutscenes and dialogues. Personally, I prefer 5 hours with great level of execution. And this will still be an RPG.

Try playing text RPGs then. You will definitely find them much more entertaining than even old school RPGs like Planescape. No visual part at all - just text. Also, check out some low-budget RPG kickstarters, you might find them very interesting. But please, don't expect BioWare to return to oldschool even a little. DA:I will obviously be a AAA modern game, not a DA:O or Baldur's Gate revamp.

I'm blind because I find visual part very important? On the contrary - you are blind, because you can't see the visual part, and how important it is. Only professional actors' work will make you truly feel what characters on the screen feel, and VOs are not enough for that. Low-poly dolls with primitive animations will naver provide truly strong emotional connection with game characters.

Ideas used in a story and its scenario are very important indeed, and how good and professional the ideas/scenario are shown is equally important. I can't take a story in a game seriously enough, if I don't see the story as professional in all terms performance. No scripted doll will ever make a character truly realistic and living. Only professional actor can do that with her/his voice, motion, and facial expressions. That's why motion capture is required to create truly story driven games.

I don't worry about models and textures here. I worry mostly about at what capacity and quality motion capture and professional actors' work will be used.

EntropicAngel wrote...

Seival wrote...

But please, don't expect BioWare to return to oldschool even a little. DA:I will obviously be a AAA modern game, not a DA:O or Baldur's Gate revamp.

Is that why Bioware has returned the tactical camera? Is that why Bioware removed level scaling? Is that why Bioware removed total health regen?

I'm not sure you know the game you're talking about.

You listed the features that any game can use.

Remember Me, for example:
- Health isn't regenerating automatically, so you have to use your skills to keep your character alive.
- Your character isn't becoming overpowered while progressing through the game.
- You can place game on "pause" to open the abilities menu and think about current combat situation to figure out what should you do next.

And Remember Me is a great modern AAA heavily story-driven game, not some old-school boredom.

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

Seival wrote...
Low-poly dolls with primitive animations will naver provide truly strong emotional connection with game characters.

Baldur's Gate, Final Fantasy 1 to 7, and the list go on...

The list of games that look like a joke by modern standards. Don't get me wrong, I was a fan of games like Planescape: Torment and Baldur's Gate. But that was long ago. Now these old games can cause nothing but a silly smile. They are too old and outdated on all possible levels.

Feeling a game's story is not less important than seeing, hearing, and playing it. I feel almost nothing while looking at and listening to the scripted dolls. VOs and texts are not enough. Actual actors work is what makes the game and its story truly alive for me.

I see real actors work in modern AAA story-driven games. In cut scenes. In dialogues. In fully motion captured scenes and sequences. This makes me feel what they feel. What their characters feel. This makes the stories truly deep and exciting. This makes something that none of old-school games can make.

Any game that has RPG elements can be called RPG. Don't argue about that, please. This is not just an assumption. Ask any game developer if you don't believe me.

If you really prefer resources to go towards the story and characters then you should be on my side, actually. Let's look back at DA:O and DA2 characters. How exactly are they formed? What make them look like people? Skills? Gear? Statistics on how many rats did they kill on your playthrough? No, only dialogues, cutscenes, and VOs make them what they are. And the point is that quantity of dialogues and cut scenes doesn't determine characters' quality.

In DA:O and DA2 only VOs were made really good, and the characters were nothing more but talking dolls.

Try to play Beyond: Two Souls, and see the difference. With 5 times less amount of gameplay you will have 100 times deeper connection to the characters, because they are played by professional actors, who were fully motion captured and scanned by state of art equipment. The characters are alive. The little amount of interactive dialogues in Beyond have much more meaning than all dialogues from DA:O and DA2 combined, because you can really feel the characters' emotions.

Beyond has the same RPG elements as Mass Effect, for example. You play a role by choosing dialogue options, and which way the story will be told, what exactly will your charater do in the key moments of the story. Beyond can be called RPG game. And in fact, I like roleplaying Jodie much more than roleplaying Shepard, Warden or Hawke... But I'm not suggesting to turn DA:I into interactive movie here. I'm suggesting to get rid of plans to make a lot of excess things like side quests, unneeded lines in dialogues, and some unneeded skills/gear/features to make dialogues/cutscenes which are only very important for main plot and characters really good by modern standards. That will require a lot of actors work and motion capture.

So, you believe that some exact gameplay features form the oldschool? By your logic, Beyond and TWD are the oldschool games then. They both have some very old gameplay features in their basis. Remember Phantasmagoria game? Bioforge? Old quests? Sounds familiar?

Gameplay features do not determine if the game will be oldschool or not. Ability and desire of devs to make the game modern do. Ability and desire to use modern technologies in each and every aspect of the game.

...And let's look at this from little different perspective. Why do you think PCs, Consoles, Tablets, and Smartphones become more and more advanced? Mostly because of creative people have unbreakable desire to make state of art media products, and society that gladly pays for such products. A desire to create and play more realistic in all terms games literally pushes the modern technologies forwards. And all this "old-school-is-the-only-way" conservatism is nothing more but the love of stagnation and decay. So, let game developers and games do the very important job both in our minds and real life. Don't try to delay them with old-school nonsense.

Here is the definition of RPG game:

"A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development. Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines."

So, basically, any game that has a least one role playing feature is an RPG. RPG game doesn't have to have all or most possible RPG elements.

By the way, Beyond: Two Souls game has two (!) RPG elements, but somehow most people don't call it RPG game. This isn't fair, while the same people are calling Diablo III with only one such feature an RPG game.

Jozape wrote...

Seival wrote...

...And let's look at this from little different perspective. Why do you think PCs, Consoles, Tablets, and Smartphones become more and more advanced? Mostly because of creative people have unbreakable desire to make state of art media products, and society that gladly pays for such products. A desire to create and play more realistic in all terms games literally pushes the modern technologies forwards. And all this "old-school-is-the-only-way" conservatism is nothing more but the love of stagnation and decay. So, let game developers and games do the very important job both in our minds and real life.

The technological demands help drive the demand for more powerful computers, but they are hardly the main reason for any part besides the graphics processing unit. Servers and workstations need that power too. Even our desktops with our bloated Microsoft operating systems can benefit from the extra juice.

And having Dragon Age not focus on the bleeding edge of technology will not do much to hinder the march of technology. There are plenty of games out there pushing the boundary, like Killzone and whatever shiny games kids play these days.

Disagree. You are dramatically underestimating the influence of game development on technological advancement.

By the way. I'm playing Killzone: Shadowfall on my PS4 now, and the game already looks much more story driven than all released Dragon Ages combined. Just because the characters look really alive.

I don't even...I have no words. Once again the BSN forums have left me utterly speechless with an entirely new flavor of insanity.

 

[Whiner]

What is this legend that M1 is much better than M2 and M3.They are all mostly the same in C&C,story and characterization.

 

[Akratus]

You must not have played ME3.

 

[eremita]

I'm not gonna argue about things that are obviously subjective (story, characters, combat etc.) regarding ME2/3 because that would end up being just another dick measuring with no conlcusion... But that part about C&C is just not true. ME3 has the most C&C and that's just a FACT. Check out the wiki... Sure, I'm not being fair because it's supposed to be a trilogy, but even if we consider the game itself (with stories and characters which are not tied to the main plot(s)/do not continue in another game), ME3 still has the most of C&C...

Aaaaand I'm done.