Dragon Age Forum News (Nov. 9, 04)

chevalier · Jan 3, 2018

Remove all ads!
Here are today's Dragon Age forum highlights, collected by NWVault. Please take into account that these are only single parts of various threads and should not be taken out of context. Bear in mind also that the posts presented here are copied as-is, and that any bad spelling and grammar does not get corrected on our end.

David Gaider, Designer

Is it "Build your own Dragon Age Module" or "Make your own fantasy world"?

I think the fantasy world building program that you and many of us want will never be intentionally built and sold as such. What I think may happen is that a game may come out and be modified by the community to fill this need. Why game companies can't seem to see the opportunity here is beyond me.
It's actually quite simple. While there may be a fairly large community of die-hard world-building fans... indeed, possibly thousands with up to tens of thousands willing to play in such worlds... that is simply not enough of an economic basis on which to support a major title which is looking for mass market appeal.

That group of thousands has many very vocal members, and on a community forum such as this where they visit regularly it may become easy to mistake their presence as representative of an equal ratio of the population at large... but if you stop and think about it, I'm sure you'll realize that just isn't so.

Games do get made that don't require mass market sales. They are made by small developers, however, with fairly small budgets. A major title like NWN or DA has a lot of people working on it and a large budget... it needs to think about how it's going to achieve sales that are in the order of a million or more. Not thousands or tens of thousands or even a few hundred thousand.

There are other considerations, obviously, and Bioware has dedicated itself to building and supporting its community of hardcore fans (and I think that shows), but the basic numbers cannot be ignored. I, myself, wish that we could put out a game that is the ultimate world builder... that would be very cool... but it is also plain to see why no-one (including us) has that on the drawing board.

will persistent worlds be in?

So I ask you.. The Bioware team.. would I, or someone with similar views/stance on these topics.. be considered as part of the problem or part of the solution? Or somewhere in between? I only ask this to clarify where Bioware's stance is on these things... I already know Bioware will not support PW's specifically (for NWN or otherwise) it's the 'principle' and not the 'application' which I am more concerned with.
Keep in mind that what Darcy mentioned is not the only reason that PW's are not supported. It is, however, yet one more reason (and a good one) why we wouldn't consider doing so. If our intention was to actually create a product which included PW-making as part of its function, I'm sure we could find a way around the potential legal problems.

As for your views on the problem... I'm not sure what you mean, really. The idea of Bioware requiring authorization through the master server for every PW and then "shutting down" anyone we suspected of charging? Is that it? If so then, no, I don't think we'd even want to go there.

More:
These reviews suggest that at best Atari did not even hand out press releases and allowed game reviewers who were left to impress their own community garnered ideas about NWN onto consumers. At worse, the publishers mislead game reviewers into thinking that NWN was a PW builder.

Here is one example of a cluey reviewer that did some homework and rightly points out the inadequacey of BW and co to "squash" those PW rumours:

<snip>
So your impression of what we said is based on the impression of some website game reviewers had of what we said? It's no wonder you're so well-informed. I think Tarmack should concede, obviously.

No Generic looking weapons
Hmmm. How were the NWN weapons generic?

Most of the weapon types allowed for variations in both color and style of various parts. The longsword, for instance, allowed you to customize the blade, hilt and guard... which made for some truly odd-looking longswords.

Meanwhile BG2 was the opposite. You might have had a unique drawing and description when you examined the longsword, and that picture might have looked different or had a particular icon, but it didn't affect how the longsword looked when you carried it in-game. Every longsword looked the same.

So I'm curious as to what you actually mean, here, insofar as generic-looking.

Innovation in modern games

Factoid: "Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind" crpg came out in 2002. Full 3D, fully "open world". It has pathable-z axis (flight, magical levitation, climb over hills, swimming, diving under water to get stuff from bottom of lakes, leaping high and far, jumping/falling off high places, etcetera). ES3: Morrowind has a tool set that many feel is more powerful than the NWN set -- harder to use. Moreover, one can add one's own upgrades to the Original Campaign game -- e.g. build a house to live in it while playing the original game (I read someone did that). "ES4: Oblivion" crpg (planned late 2005 -- we'll see) will keep all that and add quite a bit including horses to ride (because the area covered is continuous, fully explorable, and HUGE, horses are needed to cover the area in a timely way -- per ES4 developer note). So, by 2007, ES4 crpg may have had nearly all asked for on the market for one or two years already.
Factoid: "Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind" had a single player character. No party, no henchmen (or no henchmen that you couldn't just leave behind, anyhow). It was not story-driven and was, in fact, much more of a vast sandbox.

A perfectly legitimate design, and one that obviously a great number of people appreciate. It is a design that lends itself to certain strengths as well as weaknesses, its main strength being the freedom of movement and exploration for the main character. One cannot take this type of design, however, and say, "hey, look, it has all these strengths! Therefore all RPG's should have these strengths!" without also saying all RPG's should have those weaknesses, as well.

For while it may be a design that has elements you value, you cannot selectively pick out those elements and suggest that it should work equally for every other design. Dragon Age will not be that design; it is not kin to Morrowind's gameplay at all and there are some very fundamental differences which we bring up every time the Z-axis/horse-riding/flying drum gets beaten. Now you may prefer Morrowind's sandbox design and say that Dragon Age should have copied it... that's fine, if that's your opinion. It is important to recognize, however, that one cannot suggest that it should be somehow simple to take the best of both worlds and combine them AND suggest that it has all been done before. Not so.

Darcy Pajak, Assistant Producer

ELC/ILR for DA?
Cut the toolset you say?

Ok, if that's what you want.

Dialogue and voice for the main character.
We were thinking of adding full Dialogue for the character the player creates.

However, recording each type of character for each class/ race/ sex is very costly so we had to really look at the benefit.

At the moment we not inclined to add full VO because if any of the voices we picked do not live up to the imagination of the player who creates the character they'll constantly be annoyed every time their player opens their mouth. For the NPCs it much easier because the writers make them up, they make up their backgrounds, their personality, and their motivations. The player has no expectations from them apart from what we give them. We could have done the same thing if we didnt allow for character creation and gave everyone one or two archetypes that we created the background, personality etc. But thats not nearly as much fun (in my humble opinion).

We still plan to add some VO to the player character similar to BG, and NWN.

Fighting to the death is stupid. How about Morale?
Morale failing and running away is realistic, but not much fun for the average player.

As someone above mentioned, losing control of the player is frustrating, and a key gameplay goal is to limit frustration as much as possible. (there can be difficult puzzles, encounters, etc,) but adding a feature which actually introduces frustration is not what we want to do. I prefer to give the player the choice because they have the capacity to realize they are in trouble and they can always flee if they want. We should not force them.

Besides, it is much more satisfying to kill a monster in a stand up fight then to chase it down.

In addition, we have noticed that most people dont notice that monsters do not run away when you are slaughtering them. They only notice it after someone mentions it to them. (Like in Star Wars, and being able to hear the explosions and laser fire in the vacuum of space). I prefer to think of it, as the monsters do not run away because they do not think it is an option.

Either they are too dumb to realize they are going to die. Or they have some delusion that, even though all their buddies are being killed, they are special in some way, so they cant die. Or they realize that they are in trouble, but if they turn and run their going to die anyway. In the case of some horde monsters, it is all about the hive/horde/lair and they are willing to sacrifice themselves to whittle the player down like ants or bees.

More:
...Well, maybe not in all-out battles. But every single game review I've seen of stealth-related games complains when the enemies are too stupid to run for help if necessary. It makes the game too easy when the bad guys always stick to their assigned rooms, running at the PC party when they decide to enter that room. Heck, in NWN, you could clear out a room, rest, open the next door, clear out THAT room, rest, ad infinitum.

What if it was a mass-AI type reaction? The goblins will fight to the death for a while, but once the tide turns definitively against them, they'll run for help or for cover? In most situations I can think of, it would actually be a more realistic reaction if they just gave up and went non-hostile, running away and cowering. If you're specifically charged with killing each and every goblin, then obviously the goblins should fight to the last man (justifiably, since you're going to hunt them all down anyway). But if you're waylaid by a group of bandits, they're more likely to scatter eventually.
Another factor we need to consider is the general reward system player and combat.

Although a Role-Playing game at heart, where the biggest rewards will be driving the story forward, we also need to consider the "level up" reward. In previous games killing a monster=XP or skill points or whatever. So if a combat has 10 monsters with a total potential XP gain of 10000, but then a player kills 8 and the other two run away they lose a potential 2000 XP. This is also a fustration factor for some people.

It's not easy to account for that, and give the player that extra 2000 for winning, because they may be able to catch these monsters and kill them later.

But then what do we do with these little fellows? Can we justify just making them vanish into thin air? (or when the player cannot see them?) That would be obvious and seem even more illogical then monsters never running away.

I see things like this a diffrence between two general gameplay types:

Simulation - Where realism is followed as closely as possible (Nascar, MS flight simulator, the Sims.)

Arcade - Where pacing and action is more important. (Diablo, Halo, GTA).

It's always very difficult to balance "simulation" type gameplay with "arcade" type gameplay. Each has a stong following and love their type of gameplay.

Our plan is to be somewhere in the middle but where the two clash we'll generally pick arcade because more people prefure that style.

In this case i'm pretty sure we're not going to use moral in the game, except when the story itself calls for it, and it would be cool.

will persistent worlds be in?

...So I ask you.. The Bioware team.. would I, or someone with similar views/stance on these topics.. be considered as part of the problem or part of the solution? Or somewhere in between? I only ask this to clarify where Bioware's stance is on these things... I already know Bioware will not support PW's specifically (for NWN or otherwise) it's the 'principle' and not the 'application' which I am more concerned with.
As David says my comments should not not be interpreted to mean that were actively doing something to discourage persistent world builders. It means that we are not planning to add anything to the current scope that can be used solely for the persistent world creator. I consider it a completely different issue if a creator uses the tools provided to build a persistent world. Just do not expect us to fix anything which is preventing the building such a module. (e.g. if the PW server is up for 24 days and slows down and crashes, then tough beans. If people have found a way to exploit an economy system because of some skill/feat/ability we have, or have added afterwards? Then too bad.)

In principle, anyone can do what they want with the toolset, as long as it doesnt infringe on our intellectual property, or otherwise violate the End User License Agreement.

I should also mention that if we wanted to, we could code it so that servers could only host 4 or 5 people, and I guess that would really put a damper on the persistent worlds.

Brenon Holmes, Programmer

ELC/ILR for DA?

Override has nothing to do with toolset. Everything you want to add can be done with hak packs.

Override on the other hands lets CLIENT to alter the NWN files, even in SERVER VAULT, and make things available to him that should not have been in the CLIENTs control to begin with. Like soundsets, portraits, wings/tail/skincolor, headless model etc. etc. etc.

Tell me one thing that you can achieve with override which isn't available with hak pack?
This is actually incorrect. If a client overrides a file he is simply overriding the client version. All the rules calculations and everything that might be even remotely important (pathfinding, effects, events... etc) is calculated on the server and sent to the client.

This is for exactly the reason underlying your post: we can't trust the client. The only case where a file can be overriden successfully and have an impact on gameplay is if the server has the file in override.

Stanley Woo, Quality Assurance

how do u become a playtester

When you want to become a playtester you, have to go to ESRB! Every game is going to be tested by them before it can be sold.
I disagree with this statement, as I also disagree with your assertion that you "playtest" every game you buy.

When a person buys a game to play at home, they do so with the intention of having fun and maybe playing with their friends or other people online, or maybe just having a fun time until the end of the game. Sometimes, one will buya game intending to get involved in its modding community. But unless one studies games (design, programming, graphics) for a living or in school, one shouldn't say that one "playtests" them.

Playtesting implies detailed analysis, tracking, reporting, and documenting and perhaps solving problems with the game

The ESRB does not "playtest" games. They consult documents filled out by the publisher, then a three-member panel plays through parts of the game and recommend a rating based on their experience and what the publisher has told them.

I found the information here.

In closing, if you want to say you "playtest" all the games you buy, sure, you're entitled to that opinion, but I wouldn't ever want to do that with "every game I buy." I concede that I might compare the game to the project I'm currently working on at work, but I wouldn't do bug-huntingor reproducing, file any reports to myself about combat balance, or track the number of graphics glitches I've encountered in whatever level. For my entertainment dollar, I'd want to enjoy them, first and foremost.

James Henley, Technical Designer

Is it "Build your own Dragon Age Module" or "Make your own fantasy world"?

Unfortunately, Bioware seem completly oblivious to what they created when the created the toolset and made it available to the public. If you look at all the outside content created for it, it saddens me that they want to treat those people with distain.
Oh, of course, BioWare treats the Neverwinter Community with such disdain. The horrible treatment they suffer at the hands of the developers and Live Team...God forbid.

I suppose when you made that statement that you decided to overlook the near-breach-level of the EULA that the Community so frequently stands at, while BioWare supports their efforts and continually addresses their concerns regardless. I'm sure that classifies as disdain, right?

We all know how poorly they treat the modders. You know, the way they promote our material in BioWare Wednesday letters, or provide forums for specific project groups. Terrible, terrible treatment.

In fact, they disdain us so completely and utterly that they even hired some of us straight out of the community to come work for them.

I'm sure that's because they have no respect for us and all.

So please, the next time you feel like stating such a blatantly uninformed and arrogant opinion, take the time to look around at the way things really are first.

Dan Whiteside - Designer

Dragon Age Movie: The Longest Cutscene
"Why did I think of this? As DA (the OC) becomes more and more linear with less and less chance to truly effect the overall plot line, it occurs to me why not just make a movie. I mean this with no disrespect. Its a sincere thought."

I think it is meant to be disrespectful. Bioware has never said that the plot is becoming more linear, or that you could not affect the plot line. That's not the game I'm working on. We have stated the exact opposite. So either you are ignoring what we have said, or are choosing to believe that we lied.
Either way, that is a disrespectful statement.

More: I'm not disagreeing with your idea, in fact I think it is a great one. The words you chose "more and more linear, with less and less chance to affect the outcome" simply made it sound like we were changing our minds part way through. The game has lots of open, non-linear parts, and the player's decisions through the game do affect the plot. But if you are comparing this to Morrowind, then sure, it is more linear. It sounded like you were saying that Dragon Age the game would really be no different than watching an non-interactive movie.
Unfortunate word choice in your comments and a knee-jerk reaction on my part. Sorry. I just grow tired of the argument that if a game has a story to tell, then it must be linear. Since you were not trying to say that, I will just take foot from mouth and leave well enough alone.
Like I said, I do like your suggestion.

Log in or Sign up

Dragon Age Forum News (Nov. 9, 04)

chevalier Knight of Everfull Chalice ★ SPS Account Holder Veteran