Bioware Backlash

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

D3 again not released yet so you're really reaching now. A single page of scrolling dialogue, which everyone reads at a different speed, what else are the developers going to do than allow people to advance at their own pace? Make them type it back at the computer as it pops up, make them read along into a microphone?

Skipping a cutscene is one thing, a cutscene is not gameplay, and Half Life has shown that they are totally unnecessary to narrative in gaming. How can any gamer advocate skipping gameplay? If you can't win a battle drop the difficulty if you don't want to fight or can't be be bothered aren't you playing the wrong game in the first place?

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Because I dunno, maybe not all games are about combat? Where a 99% combat game like Diablo lets you skip "dialogue", and interactive-story type game would let you skip some hard bits just to watch the story. I don't see it inconceivable to start applying this approach to games with less extreme balance between the two elements, especially for RPGs. For example, IMO, the option to skip the rather lackluster combat of PS:T would have only benefited the game.

Skipping a cutscene is one thing, a cutscene is not gameplay, and Half Life has shown that they are totally unnecessary to narrative in gaming. How can any gamer advocate skipping gameplay? If you can't win a battle drop the difficulty if you don't want to fight or can't be be bothered aren't you playing the wrong game in the first place?

Half Life still had cutscenes iirc, they just weren't handled in the typical manner. And it didn't have all that much narrative to begin with.

Not everyone who plays games is a "gamer", and even gamers differ in their hardcore-ness. Then there's the people who don't really play games but would enjoy the semi-interactive story. I'd say making combat skippable where a game style accommodates it is a better way to expand the audience rather than the endless dumbing-down for the "mainstream" we keep seeing today. Sure, it'd irk the juvenile gamers who like to scream "L2P noob" in chat, but personally, I couldn't care less, and more options is always better.

 

[Phil the Nuka-Cola Dude]

Allowing gameplay to be skipped feels dangerously close to turning games into $59.99 movies. It makes sense financially, but I can't help but feel revulsion at the idea.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

As if a good portion of modern console games isn't already going in that direction with or without I think in a way it'd actually be better for the hardcore crowd since allowing to skip gameplay would mean lack of incentive to dumb it down for the mainstream audience who do basically want to play interactive stories/watch $60 CG movies.

It's interesting though that most people seem to equate "skippable gameplay" with "lack of gameplay". It's not like "skippable writing" means "lack of writing" - not in all cases anyway.

 

[Surf Solar]

So, wanting to be able to actually PLAY A GAME makes people now already "hardcore"?

It's interesting though that most people seem to equate "skippable gameplay" with "lack of gameplay". It's not like "skippable writing" means "lack of writing" - not in all cases anyway.

"Writing" is not gameplay.

 

[TorontoReign]

Allowing gameplay to be skipped feels dangerously close to turning games into $59.99 movies. It makes sense financially, but I can't help but feel revulsion at the idea.

I feel the same way. I might as well buy a movie if I want to skip everything.

 

[agiel7]

On the "Story Mode Combat," while I can see the logic behind it being suited for people like girlfriends who aren't that big on shooters or non-gamers who want to see what the fuss is all about, it still strikes me as extremely condescending.

But give Bioware a bit of credit, at least they tried to find a decent compromise between ME1 and ME2. After all, if the almighty-yet-capricious shareholders had their way, the "Action Mode Combat" or whatever such bullshit it was would have been the sole way for playing this game.

 

[Tagaziel]

"Writing" is not gameplay.

Planescape: Torment called, it asked me to tell you nasty things.

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

Because I dunno, maybe not all games are about combat? Where a 99% combat game like Diablo lets you skip "dialogue", and interactive-story type game would let you skip some hard bits just to watch the story. I don't see it inconceivable to start applying this approach to games with less extreme balance between the two elements, especially for RPGs. For example, IMO, the option to skip the rather lackluster combat of PS:T would have only benefited the game.

Again being able to skip dialogue is a by product not intended design, everyone reads at a different speed and even in a fully voiced game developers need to allow for those who rely on subtitles. What would you rather have PS:T with brilliant combat or the same lackluster combat that's skippable? What do you think is easier and more cost effective, make a game with excellent combat and state of the art AI or make a game with a 'I win' button?

Half Life still had cutscenes iirc, they just weren't handled in the typical manner. And it didn't have all that much narrative to begin with.

Half Life had a few scripted sequences which never change camera and only rarely remove the control from the player but no cutscenes.

Not everyone who plays games is a "gamer", and even gamers differ in their hardcore-ness. Then there's the people who don't really play games but would enjoy the semi-interactive story. I'd say making combat skippable where a game style accommodates it is a better way to expand the audience rather than the endless dumbing-down for the "mainstream" we keep seeing today. Sure, it'd irk the juvenile gamers who like to scream "L2P noob" in chat, but personally, I couldn't care less, and more options is always better.

Once upon a time there were many different gaming genres, many didn't feature combat or rely on hand/eye coordination the gaming went corporate and niche gaming was left to the indies. Do you really think that triple A gaming is going to stop being streamlined when they start making gameplay skippable? Gaming can already cater for different audiences by making different types of games, do you think that will continue if they start making games with universal appeal?

It's interesting though that most people seem to equate "skippable gameplay" with "lack of gameplay". It's not like "skippable writing" means "lack of writing" - not in all cases anyway.

What's the ratio of combat to non combat in a typical Bioware game? Not talking about just getting from A to B, 65% combat 35% non combat perhaps? Do you think they are going to keep that balance or make it more even? With the push to fully voicing games and more pre-rendered cutscenes for their obsession with making a cinematic experience what do you reckon will happen, they'll increase the amount of non combat activities and make larger games for the same money, or will they cut the amount of combat down?

"Writing" is not gameplay.

Zork wants a word with you.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Again being able to skip dialogue is a by product not intended design, everyone reads at a different speed and even in a fully voiced game developers need to allow for those who rely on subtitles. What would you rather have PS:T with brilliant combat or the same lackluster combat that's skippable? What do you think is easier and more cost effective, make a game with excellent combat and state of the art AI or make a game with a 'I win' button?

It's less a question of would, and more of a question of is. How many games with brilliant combat and SotA AI do you know anyway? Much less those which don't make combat their focus?

Once upon a time there were many different gaming genres, many didn't feature combat or rely on hand/eye coordination the gaming went corporate and niche gaming was left to the indies. Do you really think that triple A gaming is going to stop being streamlined when they start making gameplay skippable? Gaming can already cater for different audiences by making different types of games, do you think that will continue if they start making games with universal appeal?

That's a good point, though I'd say quite often in the case or RPGs the balance is even enough to go either way. The combination of gameplay styles in one genre makes the intended audience more narrow, hence the companies struggling to bring RPGs to mainstream - and usually ruining their essence in the process.

What's the ratio of combat to non combat in a typical Bioware game? Not talking about just getting from A to B, 65% combat 35% non combat perhaps? Do you think they are going to keep that balance or make it more even? With the push to fully voicing games and more pre-rendered cutscenes for their obsession with making a cinematic experience what do you reckon will happen, they'll increase the amount of non combat activities and make larger games for the same money, or will they cut the amount of combat down?

I think the answer is they won't do it at all and keep doing what they're doing. In an ideal world though, they'd offer options without crippling the rest of the product...

 

[Ben]

I wish people would stop bringing up Half Life.

This whole claim that "we don't have cutscenes" is bullshit. They have events which are mandatory to watch. They pause if you aren't looking at them. There is no way to skip the 'event' and the 'event' usually involves looking at an orange map with an orange grid and orange terrain features. It is total bullshit.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I'll defend the 'skip' option. I mean, how many times have we seen the same dammed intro screen on our fave games? If a games linear as shit, once you've seen it once, you know it. You'll only watch it again if you either a) like the scene or b) you're attempting to play it like it's your first time. It might actually be a good thing....

Let the CoD drones skip the story! Then we can laugh as they fund games with intelligent cutscenes and diolouges for us fusty old sods to play!

A word on subtitiles. The ability to easily pause the game so you can read them in your own time is vital. My hearing is rather shot (not my fault!) which means for some voices I must have subtitles to understand what's going on. Also, sometimes I play on mute (while listening to music) which means I need subtitles again. Lastly, subtites are pretty easy and cheap to do, which means that an English language game could be subtitled for smaller langauges.

In Europe alone there are 60+ languages which I guess only a four / five are catered to remotely well. Yes, some of the languages in which they also speak a 'dominant' language as fluently as their mother tounge (Breton / Welsh / Catalan) but there are 'second tier' ones in which many people don't (Polish / Turkish / Hungarian). Doing subtitles for these languages too will help smooth down the ruffled feathers about cultural imperalism just a tad, as well as make them more accesible.

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

It's less a question of would, and more of a question of is. How many games with brilliant combat and SotA AI do you know anyway? Much less those which don't make combat their focus?

Hardly any and with a skip combat option they'll have even less incentive to improve.

I think the answer is they won't do it at all and keep doing what they're doing. In an ideal world though, they'd offer options without crippling the rest of the product...

They'll keep doing what they are doing for the time being, but as development costs rise. As games become more mainstream they'll start redesigning games to be more interactive but less reactive, if you know what I mean. Bioware already keep trotting out 'making more of a cinematic experience'.

I wish people would stop bringing up Half Life.

This whole claim that "we don't have cutscenes" is bullshit. They have events which are mandatory to watch. They pause if you aren't looking at them. There is no way to skip the 'event' and the 'event' usually involves looking at an orange map with an orange grid and orange terrain features. It is total bullshit.

Hmm are you sure you've actually played Half Life?

I'll defend the 'skip' option. I mean, how many times have we seen the same dammed intro screen on our fave games? If a games linear as shit, once you've seen it once, you know it. You'll only watch it again if you either a) like the scene or b) you're attempting to play it like it's your first time. It might actually be a good thing....

Intros are not gameplay, people are advocating being able to skip gameplay not the same thing at all. Effectively they want a 'I win' cheat bound to a button for them, not so they can avoid combat by other means but so they can reap the benefits of wining the combat without actually playing.