Agreed but there are others who come pretty close. But I will 100% agree and call Bioware my favorite developer with Bethesda coming in at an extremely close second.RagTagBand said:
Poll: Bioware needs to grow up
- Thread starter BloatedGuppy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
If any of these was news to you, then you have no-one to blame but yourself for not playing these games years ago. The unspoken rule of spoilers is that they cease being considered such if the game's been out for more than 2 years. Besides, you were on a thread discussing BioWare stories. What were you expecting- half of the content to be redacted?gring said:
On a whole Bioware run rings around almost every other RPG dev.
Although granted i do think that their key story lines aren't the best.
That can't really be helped though, i mean no game, or their dev, is perfect. I mean take Baldur's gate series, brilliant key stories, but the characters were pretty weak and their "developments" if you can even call them that, were even weaker.
It seems to me that the OP is just going "Waah, my favourite dev isn't perfect." when they seem to be missing the fact that no one is perfect.
Although granted i do think that their key story lines aren't the best.
That can't really be helped though, i mean no game, or their dev, is perfect. I mean take Baldur's gate series, brilliant key stories, but the characters were pretty weak and their "developments" if you can even call them that, were even weaker.
It seems to me that the OP is just going "Waah, my favourite dev isn't perfect." when they seem to be missing the fact that no one is perfect.
I had to stop reading there, Everything about that game was ass, just plain out ass. You DO NOT go from a RPG like Dragon age, and make it into... THAT.BloatedGuppy said:
ha tis all good mateAverageJoe said:I'll admit my post was pretty harsh, I should have been more personal about it rather than making a judgment of all RPG players. I'm sick and irritable today (got a bad cold, blocked up throat, can hardly breathe and hurts when I cough). So I apologize for taking it out that waygmaverick019 said:
I don't necessarily need instant gratification either, but I just find the DnD and Turn Based style gameplay incredibly dull because they are nonsensicle in terms of a real fight and unimmersive. I do need my games to be immersive and make me feel like I'm really there in my characters shoes. And it annoys me somewhat their arent many great RPGs with gameplay that I can actually enjoy, because the actual concept of RPGs highly appeals to me.
but i do get what your saying, they don't really have rpg's out right now that show good detailed action with the rpg side still intact, it's either action with next to no RPG, or RPG with DnD based stats/items.
while i love fable, it did drop nearly all of it's rpgness it had to it...and DA2 wasn't what it could've been.
have you tried witcher 2 perhaps? the first one is a bit dry to get through, but the 2nd one's gameplay is a blast IMO (a little punishing, but still fun) and balances out a nice action vs stats type rpg.
If you look a little farther, many characters (if usually not the overall plot) are very 'gray-area'. Example: SW: Legacy comics and Fate of the Jedi novels.EmperorSubcutaneous said:
I had to look up exactly what plucky means:
Having or showing determined courage in the face of difficulties.
This seems a strange thing to pick on. First off, I don't think all of the companions really fit this sterotype. Shale certainly thought they were all doomed. Juhani from KOTOR didn't show a lot of courage, nor did Atton really. Now when you're faced with a major challenge, wouldn't it make sense that your companions at least MOSTLY be courageous? Especially in ME2, when you're trying to select the absolute best in an entire GALAXY. Not like it is slim pickings.
Was DA2 a step in the right direction? Yes and no. It was a great game. Flawed, but great. It just made a shitty Dragon Age sequel.
Having or showing determined courage in the face of difficulties.
This seems a strange thing to pick on. First off, I don't think all of the companions really fit this sterotype. Shale certainly thought they were all doomed. Juhani from KOTOR didn't show a lot of courage, nor did Atton really. Now when you're faced with a major challenge, wouldn't it make sense that your companions at least MOSTLY be courageous? Especially in ME2, when you're trying to select the absolute best in an entire GALAXY. Not like it is slim pickings.
Was DA2 a step in the right direction? Yes and no. It was a great game. Flawed, but great. It just made a shitty Dragon Age sequel.
I also think DA2 was a step in the right direction, it was a different kind of story than the generic 'save the world' story that most RPGs have. Don't get me wrong I still like the 'save the world stories' IF DONE RIGHT. I however will remian faithfull with bioware and we shall see how ME3 goes.
Oh, well. I guess this is what I get for not researching a game I haven't played in over a decade.Nulmas said:
I figure I got mixed up because Planescape still plays similarly to Baldur's Gate. Did they work with the same engine?
I'd disagree that people don't want deep and involving stories; I think they might want them, but they don't expect them from videogames.
Games, in general, are about getting away from reality; when one plays a game, there is an element of fantasy involved. Games enable what is impossible in the real world, such as defending the galaxy from ancient unknowable evils.
While it might not be the most original or engaging or complex story, the "hero saves the world" story is one that apparently works for games. I remember being the hero saving the world with my band of plucky companions in The Final Fantasy Legend for the GameBoy. That game was released in 1990, and Square has been pretty much remaking it since then, and the games still sell.
It may be an unfair comparison because it's a JRPG (referring here to the entire Final Fantasy series), but I think the "hero saves the world" model shows up pretty consistently in Western RPGs as well. In Diablo, you literally fight the devil. And again in Diablo II. And presumably once more in Diablo III.
Let me qualify the above by saying that I long ago grew tired of the "hero saves the day" story. After a while it just gets predictable and boring, which is precisely the opposite of what I want in a game.
There are ways to work with the formula though, and I will present as an example Bastion.
Here, the world has already been destroyed. If there were a prequel to Bastion about plucky heroes trying to save the world, then they would all die. And the world would end. Bastion certainly features a hero, doing something that resembles saving a world. "Saving" isn't the word I would use though; "salvaging" is a better fit. Bastion also scores points for its choice system, or, more accurately, lack thereof. There are, if I recall correctly, only two major choices during the game ("battering ram or Zulf?" and the ending choice, for those who have played it). Both of those choices had very significant and relevant effects on the story; carrying Zulf down that corridor, with no option but to endure the arrows and bullets of the Ura and keep going, and to see how their view of the protagonist changed as a result, is and most likely will remain one of the most emotionally powerful sequences I've seen in a game. I nearly shed a tear. Moreover, Bastion doesn't attempt to shoehorn their options into "right" or "wrong." There is definitely the choice of vengeance or mercy in Zulf's case, but either choice would make sense, and one is not morally superior to the other (you may argue that mercy is the "right" or "good" option, and that may be true, but the game doesn't present it as such). Perhaps it's merely that Bastion's choices aren't as diametrically opposed as BioWare's tend to be (more on this later); your choices are merely "Take Zulf" and "Leave Zulf" as opposed to "Take Zulf, reunite him with his long-lost family, give them 10 gold and a ticket to the land of rainbows and happiness" and "Leave Zulf, take all his money, tell his family he's a psychotic mass-murderer and then curbstomp his favorite innocent adorable puppy with a golf shoe."
And this leads me to one of my bigger gripes with BioWare: morality
I don't want games to tell me what is right or wrong. This goes into personal philosophy a bit, but I tend to take a relativist (not to be confused with relativistic! *obligatory physics joke*) viewpoint when it comes to ethics; I think people should determine what is right and wrong for themselves (PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not turn this into a debate on ethics. That is not my intention, and this is not the venue). I think Yahtzee does a good job of summing up my criticisms of "morality" in games in his Infamous 2 review, and I would direct you there if you are curious.
What BioWare did that I did like was the companion approval system in Dragon Age: Origins and
Dragon Age II. People have differing opinions, and I like that they attempted to bring that across in gameplay. I wish it were a little more in-depth though, such as characters having opinions on more than one topic (the example that comes to mind is Dragon Age II's "ANDERS LOVE MAGES vs. FENRIS HATE MAGES"). I believe BioWare does a pretty good job with their characters though; they make them fairly likeable, and attempt to make them relatable by giving them flaws and conflicts. They aren't perfect though, often only developing only one or two traits about a character, or basing characters on stereotypes or archetypes.
That said, BioWare characters are still some of my favorite game characters ever. Mordin, from Mass Effect 2, jumps immediately to mind (I admit I may be biased, as I myself am a man of science and was able to relate to Mordin. I never infected an entire species with infertility though.) Mordin is a complex character; he is aware of the devastation of the Krogan as a result of the genophage, and yet he staunchly defends it as the best option. He is clearly troubled by his actions though, as he has since dedicated his life to helping others, revealing a hidden guilt beneath his clinical detachment. He also has undergoes actual emotional growth when confronted by Maelon (during the course of the entire mission), which I will not spoil, but which I will say I found touching.
Personally, I would like to see a BioWare game focused on the characters themselves. Clarification: I would like to see a BioWare game wherein the characters drive the story, rather than just being along for the ride, as they seem to be in the Dragon Age and Mass Effect stories. Unfortunately, such a game would probably sell abysmally, and as such will probably never be made. Game companies still need to make money, which means they're going to stick with what sells, which means stories, in general, won't stray too far from the "hero saves the world" model (limiting ourselves to the RPG genre, remember). I commend BioWare for breaking up the model with interesting bits with their character arcs and witty dialogue, but I shake my head and tut-tut disapprovingly at their insistence of shoving 10+ hours of largely-irrelevant side quests in. I could run through Mass Effect in about 8-10 hours if I only did the main story missions, and as far as the story went, it wouldn't make much of a difference. If you're going to give me optional quests BioWare, please give me a reason to do them besides building my stats. I found myself asking why a Grey Warden tasked with stopping the ancient unknowableCthulhu Archdemon (if we have the "hero saves the world model," we might as well run with it) would take time to run errands for people who post things on Chanter's Boards.
This post has gotten quite a bit longer than I intended. Oops. Sorry for that brick of text.
Summary: BioWare's main storylines are rather plain and unimaginative, but they add things to give the overall game variety and charm, most notably for me the characters. I wish they would focus on adding quality content instead of quantity of content, but then they couldn't advertise that the game "contains 30+ hours of gameplay!"
Just my two cents.
Please tell me how wrong and stupid I am and how I'm a total n00b BioWare fanboy.
Games, in general, are about getting away from reality; when one plays a game, there is an element of fantasy involved. Games enable what is impossible in the real world, such as defending the galaxy from ancient unknowable evils.
While it might not be the most original or engaging or complex story, the "hero saves the world" story is one that apparently works for games. I remember being the hero saving the world with my band of plucky companions in The Final Fantasy Legend for the GameBoy. That game was released in 1990, and Square has been pretty much remaking it since then, and the games still sell.
It may be an unfair comparison because it's a JRPG (referring here to the entire Final Fantasy series), but I think the "hero saves the world" model shows up pretty consistently in Western RPGs as well. In Diablo, you literally fight the devil. And again in Diablo II. And presumably once more in Diablo III.
Let me qualify the above by saying that I long ago grew tired of the "hero saves the day" story. After a while it just gets predictable and boring, which is precisely the opposite of what I want in a game.
There are ways to work with the formula though, and I will present as an example Bastion.
Here, the world has already been destroyed. If there were a prequel to Bastion about plucky heroes trying to save the world, then they would all die. And the world would end. Bastion certainly features a hero, doing something that resembles saving a world. "Saving" isn't the word I would use though; "salvaging" is a better fit. Bastion also scores points for its choice system, or, more accurately, lack thereof. There are, if I recall correctly, only two major choices during the game ("battering ram or Zulf?" and the ending choice, for those who have played it). Both of those choices had very significant and relevant effects on the story; carrying Zulf down that corridor, with no option but to endure the arrows and bullets of the Ura and keep going, and to see how their view of the protagonist changed as a result, is and most likely will remain one of the most emotionally powerful sequences I've seen in a game. I nearly shed a tear. Moreover, Bastion doesn't attempt to shoehorn their options into "right" or "wrong." There is definitely the choice of vengeance or mercy in Zulf's case, but either choice would make sense, and one is not morally superior to the other (you may argue that mercy is the "right" or "good" option, and that may be true, but the game doesn't present it as such). Perhaps it's merely that Bastion's choices aren't as diametrically opposed as BioWare's tend to be (more on this later); your choices are merely "Take Zulf" and "Leave Zulf" as opposed to "Take Zulf, reunite him with his long-lost family, give them 10 gold and a ticket to the land of rainbows and happiness" and "Leave Zulf, take all his money, tell his family he's a psychotic mass-murderer and then curbstomp his favorite innocent adorable puppy with a golf shoe."
And this leads me to one of my bigger gripes with BioWare: morality
I don't want games to tell me what is right or wrong. This goes into personal philosophy a bit, but I tend to take a relativist (not to be confused with relativistic! *obligatory physics joke*) viewpoint when it comes to ethics; I think people should determine what is right and wrong for themselves (PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not turn this into a debate on ethics. That is not my intention, and this is not the venue). I think Yahtzee does a good job of summing up my criticisms of "morality" in games in his Infamous 2 review, and I would direct you there if you are curious.
What BioWare did that I did like was the companion approval system in Dragon Age: Origins and
Dragon Age II. People have differing opinions, and I like that they attempted to bring that across in gameplay. I wish it were a little more in-depth though, such as characters having opinions on more than one topic (the example that comes to mind is Dragon Age II's "ANDERS LOVE MAGES vs. FENRIS HATE MAGES"). I believe BioWare does a pretty good job with their characters though; they make them fairly likeable, and attempt to make them relatable by giving them flaws and conflicts. They aren't perfect though, often only developing only one or two traits about a character, or basing characters on stereotypes or archetypes.
That said, BioWare characters are still some of my favorite game characters ever. Mordin, from Mass Effect 2, jumps immediately to mind (I admit I may be biased, as I myself am a man of science and was able to relate to Mordin. I never infected an entire species with infertility though.) Mordin is a complex character; he is aware of the devastation of the Krogan as a result of the genophage, and yet he staunchly defends it as the best option. He is clearly troubled by his actions though, as he has since dedicated his life to helping others, revealing a hidden guilt beneath his clinical detachment. He also has undergoes actual emotional growth when confronted by Maelon (during the course of the entire mission), which I will not spoil, but which I will say I found touching.
Personally, I would like to see a BioWare game focused on the characters themselves. Clarification: I would like to see a BioWare game wherein the characters drive the story, rather than just being along for the ride, as they seem to be in the Dragon Age and Mass Effect stories. Unfortunately, such a game would probably sell abysmally, and as such will probably never be made. Game companies still need to make money, which means they're going to stick with what sells, which means stories, in general, won't stray too far from the "hero saves the world" model (limiting ourselves to the RPG genre, remember). I commend BioWare for breaking up the model with interesting bits with their character arcs and witty dialogue, but I shake my head and tut-tut disapprovingly at their insistence of shoving 10+ hours of largely-irrelevant side quests in. I could run through Mass Effect in about 8-10 hours if I only did the main story missions, and as far as the story went, it wouldn't make much of a difference. If you're going to give me optional quests BioWare, please give me a reason to do them besides building my stats. I found myself asking why a Grey Warden tasked with stopping the ancient unknowable
This post has gotten quite a bit longer than I intended. Oops. Sorry for that brick of text.
Summary: BioWare's main storylines are rather plain and unimaginative, but they add things to give the overall game variety and charm, most notably for me the characters. I wish they would focus on adding quality content instead of quantity of content, but then they couldn't advertise that the game "contains 30+ hours of gameplay!"
Just my two cents.
Please tell me how wrong and stupid I am and how I'm a total n00b BioWare fanboy.
That said, Bioware are taking great steps towards adding shades of grey to the Sith Empire in The Old Republic, should prove to be interesting.Snotnarok said:
The "They just can't put together a working, polished game to save their lives" in that quote referred to Obsidian, not Bioware. I'm aware of Obsidian's hilarious track record with buggy games. I'd have to have been living under a rock not to be.PuraClassic said:
Actually yes I looked this up the other day. Planescape Torment was using it first in development but Bioware used it to make Baldur's Gate. I also learned that Planescape Torment was unfinished. Ok quick question to anyone reading this were the Fallout games unfinished too? Seriously it's like they have never finished a game. I still like them but good grief.IamLEAM1983 said:Oh, well. I guess this is what I get for not researching a game I haven't played in over a decade.Nulmas said:
FBI Agent Reporting In
On the overall subject, I have truly enjoyed Bioware's story telling (well I've only really played the Mass Effect series and read those books). The moral choice system may not be all the hot potatoes its cracked up to be, I believe they excel in character depth. Particualrly I found myself bedazzled with characters like Saren, Mordin, and Thane. The main story and explicit amount to know of within the universe truly has been a great moment for me this console generation, and has easily replaced the story telling of my previous favorite developer Squaresoft. I don't think they are the best and some games marry gameplay and story far better (Bastion would be the best example I can think of this year), however I truly do enjoy Bioware's story they are telling with Mass Effect.
To be transparent I have yet to play Jade Empire (I really need to), any of the Kotor series, or Dragon Age.
On the overall subject, I have truly enjoyed Bioware's story telling (well I've only really played the Mass Effect series and read those books). The moral choice system may not be all the hot potatoes its cracked up to be, I believe they excel in character depth. Particualrly I found myself bedazzled with characters like Saren, Mordin, and Thane. The main story and explicit amount to know of within the universe truly has been a great moment for me this console generation, and has easily replaced the story telling of my previous favorite developer Squaresoft. I don't think they are the best and some games marry gameplay and story far better (Bastion would be the best example I can think of this year), however I truly do enjoy Bioware's story they are telling with Mass Effect.
To be transparent I have yet to play Jade Empire (I really need to), any of the Kotor series, or Dragon Age.
First, I completely agree with the OP on Bioware. I got into ME1 because it seemed like an interesting universe at frist, but at about the halfway point. Really, all the best arguments I can make against the ME games were made better by Shamus Young in Spoiler Warning.
On Alpha Protocol, it seems like just about nobody actually understood the plot, which makes me think that video games aren't really ready for that level of storytelling. You had to pay attention extremely closely to get even a vague idea of some of the more subtle plot points. Furthermore, I have never encountered a bug in either Alpha Protocol or New Vegas, even when playing new vegas on an integrated graphics, under min requirements laptop. To me, Obsidian has always delivered more solid experiences than Bioware.
Finally, Bastion is definitely one of the most expertly entwined story with its gameplay, giving me a little hope for the future.
On Alpha Protocol, it seems like just about nobody actually understood the plot, which makes me think that video games aren't really ready for that level of storytelling. You had to pay attention extremely closely to get even a vague idea of some of the more subtle plot points. Furthermore, I have never encountered a bug in either Alpha Protocol or New Vegas, even when playing new vegas on an integrated graphics, under min requirements laptop. To me, Obsidian has always delivered more solid experiences than Bioware.
Finally, Bastion is definitely one of the most expertly entwined story with its gameplay, giving me a little hope for the future.
Speaking of Dungeons and Dragons, and Baldur's gate I came across some information on Baldur's Gate 3: The Black Hound yesterday and it made me sad. I would like to remind you of a game that have been made, but...sadly won't see the light of day.Razada said:
Honestly I think if Bioware wants to focus on its characters it should shrink the focus of its plots. Individual character's importance gets lost in the grand scope of things. I think they tried to attempt it with DA2, but ultimately failed due to time constraints and poor writing. Any ONE of those conflicts between either the qunari(can't remember spelling), and mage/templars could have taken an entire game if they tried. They tried to do too much, and as a result each conflict feels underdeveloped.
Speaking of growing up, you know who I think needs to grow up? Most gamers, Star Wars fans, Sonic fans, and anyone else whose ever used the words "ruined forevar" with a straight face and/or without irony.
I have indeed, the Witcher is my favorite RPG and Witcher 2 was excellent too.gmaverick019 said:ha tis all good mateAverageJoe said:I'll admit my post was pretty harsh, I should have been more personal about it rather than making a judgment of all RPG players. I'm sick and irritable today (got a bad cold, blocked up throat, can hardly breathe and hurts when I cough). So I apologize for taking it out that waygmaverick019 said:
I don't necessarily need instant gratification either, but I just find the DnD and Turn Based style gameplay incredibly dull because they are nonsensicle in terms of a real fight and unimmersive. I do need my games to be immersive and make me feel like I'm really there in my characters shoes. And it annoys me somewhat their arent many great RPGs with gameplay that I can actually enjoy, because the actual concept of RPGs highly appeals to me.
but i do get what your saying, they don't really have rpg's out right now that show good detailed action with the rpg side still intact, it's either action with next to no RPG, or RPG with DnD based stats/items.
while i love fable, it did drop nearly all of it's rpgness it had to it...and DA2 wasn't what it could've been.
have you tried witcher 2 perhaps? the first one is a bit dry to get through, but the 2nd one's gameplay is a blast IMO (a little punishing, but still fun) and balances out a nice action vs stats type rpg.