Comments on: The Big Quest(ion)

By: DC Hats

DC Hats — Fri, 01 Oct 2010 10:46:24 +0000

http://www.umiren.com
http://www.stylesc.com
http://www.tiffanytoday.com
http://www.mon-cl-er.com
come on,we welcome you arrival

By: fadewatches

fadewatches — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 01:36:39 +0000

I am a fanatic watch collection, especially the well-known watches, you also can do, just click on my name!!!!!!!!

By: fade watches

fade watches — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 06:45:11 +0000

Dears, our web site provides a variety of cheap price fade omega watches , welcome your arrival,just click here http://www.watchesky.com/ .

By: Chuck

Chuck — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 12:52:56 +0000

Great Read!

This will be spoilers to anyone who hasn’t finished Mass Effect, BTW.

“It also goes some way to creating an illusion that multiple endings aren’t about pushing a particular coloured button in a scene near the end.”

My biggest gripe with ME, which I’m currently playing through for the 6th time in anticipation of the sequel, is exactly this: 2 endings. That is all. ALL that stuff you went through, ALL the people you saved, ALL the people you killed, ALL the people you allowed to be killed, ALL the planets you visit, and 2 endings. It turns out in the end that the ONLY choice they give you in the game that actually affects the outcome is “save the council, or let ‘em die.”

I dearly hope the sequel takes more of my actions from number 1 into account. I let the Rachni Queen live. Didn’t mean a damn thing in number 1, but maybe in number 2 they’ll return as allies, or start another war. Will Helena Blake still be skulking about? Will I catch her running a slave ring? Will she provide me with information or weapons in gratitude for taking out her cohorts? Can I use the moon base to train my team, now that it’s little VI problem is all sorted out?

Damn it! I took ALL THAT TIME, wrestled with ALL THESE dilemmas, and all that ultimately mattered is whether I want the council to kiss my ass, or Anderson and Udina to kiss my ass in the final cutscene.

By: The Bag

The Bag — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 13:56:55 +0000

I honestly believe that craftmanship is a function of economics. I bet most game developers would LOVE to create what we all want. Its just, do they really have the thousands of people and infinite man-hours to do it.

It’s not necessarily about creating more content but being smarter about the content we create.

By: Rinox

Rinox — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 21:22:06 +0000

…shouldn’t reply without refreshing. Agree with Kadayi.

By: Rinox

Rinox — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 21:21:06 +0000

@ WCG

Maybe it’s the fanboy in me speaking, but I think the Witcher’s ending is rather fitting given its musing on inevitability, free will and the possibility of true neutrality. But that’s just my interpretation.

By: Kadayi

Kadayi — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:28:29 +0000

@WCG

But you do realise that one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist right? The whole point about The Witcher was it put you in the situation of having to choose a side, neither of which particularly could claim the moral high ground. Generally this is more true to life. The history books might be written by the winners, but that doesn’t necessarily make them any more righteous than the vanquished. Even the most despicable people in History thought that their path was the path of honour and glory. Its only really in fiction that evil exists as an ambition.

By: Erica

Erica — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:44:55 +0000

“there’s a lot of folk here saying that the depth of the content in sidequests is just a function of economics, but I’d beg to differ. It’s about good craftsmanship.”

We’re getting there, I think.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 15:20:47 +0000

Also, I’ll throw in that I think the problem is scope. As mentioned above, Spector wants to narrow-focus down to a city block. But most open-world questy games these days (Fallout 3, Oblivion, Mass Effect, etc) see bigness as a bullet-point feature.

They want to show off how huge their world is – and that’s not a bad thing in-and-of-itself. You can understand the appeal, and it helps develop a sense of grandeur. But the necessary compromise is a lot of cut-and-pasted buildings and quests and a lack of depth in the characters and story branches.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 15:18:11 +0000

Fable 2 has some excellent touches on this concept – helping the organized crime folks when you’re a kid, or helping the sheriff, leads to an entire neighborhood becoming an underworld slum vs up-and-coming luxury town.

But also the usual shallow “be ultra-good to earn goodness points vs be ultra-bad to earn badness points” thing.

By: WCG

WCG — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:36:15 +0000

Hmm,… I’m amazed at the praise for the decisions in The Witcher. I guess we all want something different, don’t we? I loved the game, but I was very disappointed that my decisions DIDN’T matter (in the sense that nothing I could do would improve the situation). I remember trying to avoid taking sides, in order to act as a rational peacemaker, and it just turned both sides into my implacable enemies. If nothing you can do will help, since bloody violence is inevitable, why is your decision at all meaningful?

No, I like the more black-or-white decisions, probably because I like to play the hero. If my characters are basically good guys, trying to do the right thing, they should be able to make choices that reflect that (likewise, if they’re just selfishly looking to grab whatever they can get, which is a more realistic definition of “evil”). And their decisions should have clear consequences. They should have an impact on the gameworld, for good or bad.