[情報] Eurogamer專訪 DA2首席設計師 Mike Laidlaw

[antiflunk (科科科阿科科科)]

出處： http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-03-10-biowares-mike-laidlaw-
a-defence-of-dragon-age-ii-interview
縮 http://ppt.cc/xQp6

鑒於DA2上市至今受到不斷的唾...熱烈討論，而眾所皆知 DA:O 首席設計師之一的
Brent Knowles 在DA2開發過程似乎因為理念緣故離職，另一名首席設計師
Mike Laidlaw 則活躍在媒體面前為 DA2 說盡好話。下面這篇專訪，名稱就已經
很不客氣的定為「Mike Laidlaw 為DA2辯護」(之前誰想得到DA系列需要辯護...)，
我認為問題都有問到重點，他的回答也頗妙，所以翻譯出來與大家分享。
錯謬處請不吝指正。

我對遊戲產業的理解不多，只能說可以看出來這篇文字是有著他強烈個人立場的；
至於裡面牽扯到Bioware內部怎樣的眉角，是不是能代表官方立場，
我就無法評論了。我個人的一點心得和整理放在最後面。

=========================

Eurogamer: What's the mood like out there?
Eurogamer: 你們的心情怎樣？

Mike Laidlaw: We're just very happy to see it out. What we're seeing
is something not really a surprise to us: we're seeing a bit of polarisation.
It's not radical, it's not like people are bursting into open warfare about
things, thank god. We knew going into Dragon Age II we were making some
changes. I wouldn't necessarily say changes to make it more accessible, but
to make it present itself in a different way. We knew it carried some
elements of risk. Some people are reacting to that, and it's fine - it's
actually good. I'd much rather make a game that challenges people and doesn't
just rest on its laurels.

我們看到遊戲上市很開心。我們所見的並不讓我們驚訝；我們看到了一些兩極化現象。它
不極端；不像是說人們因此爆發全面戰爭，感謝神。我們知道DA2有些改變。我不一定會
說這是更受歡迎的改變，而是以不同的方式呈現它。我們知道它帶有一些風險因素。一些
人對它有所反應，這沒關係—甚至很棒。我更願意做一款挑戰人們的遊戲，而不只是停留
在它的榮銜上。

Eurogamer: Are you happy with the reviews of Dragon Age II?
Eurogamer: 你對DA2的評論感到高興嗎？

Mike Laidlaw: I am. What we're seeing is a pretty wide range; I've seen
perfects, I've seen less than perfects. There are some things I think that
are certainly fair criticisms: the re-use of the levels is something we knew
was a bit of a risk, but we wanted to make sure there was more content rather
than less, so re-using some of the spaces and coming to them again was
certainly one we were careful about and tried to re-use as artfully as we
could. When we look at reviews and certain concerns that gives us really
good, solid feedback to work from in the future. When I see reviews that
comment on the way the story is told or interactions with the followers,
those are very, very positive, and I'm extremely gratified.

是的。我們看到的是相當大範圍的評論；我看過完美的(評價)，也看過低於完美的(評價)
。有些評論我認為相當公平；地點的重複使用是我們早已知道會有一點風險的，但我們想
要確保裡面是更多的而不是更少的內容，所以重複使用和重複進入一些空間，是我們小心
處理的事情，並試圖盡可能技巧性地設計。我們看到了一些評價與擔心，這給我們真的很
好很紮實的回響，可供未來使用。當我看到評論是關於說故事的方式或與同伴的互動時，
他們是非常、非常正面的，而我真的很欣慰。

Eurogamer: I've seen scores as low as a 6/10 - what do you think when you
read those?
Eurogamer: 我曾看過低到6/10的分數—你讀到的時候怎麼想？

Mike Laidlaw: Well it's hard to know exactly what's going on with scores that
are really, really negative. One possible culprit could just be a change
backlash, i.e. this isn't Origins and I wanted Origins 2. There may be some
degree of what I would honestly say is emotional investment in the Origins
story, or in the way Origins was presented which is leading to a stronger
than average reaction of disappointment. That's understandable, and if
anything that really is a compliment to the work on Origins. I'm not sure
it's an entirely fair assessment to say all games must be like the previous
game. I think we would have seen just as much negativity if we just, as I
used to joke, stapled two Archdemons together and called it a super blight.
It boils down to a game that challenges a fair amount of convention: it
doesn't tell the usual fantasy story or present the usual fantasy combat, and
in doing so it does run the risk of someone going, "Wow, this is just too
different and I cannot handle it."

呃，實在很難精確知道這種非常、非常負面的分數是怎麼了。一個可能的禍首是對改變的
反彈—例如，「這不是Origins, 而我要的是Origins 2」。我會誠實的說，也許有某種程
度的對Origins故事的情緒投入，或是對Origins的呈現方式的情緒投入，導致了比平均更
強的失望反應。這是可理解的，要說的話這實在是對Origins的讚美。我並不確定說「所
有的遊戲都應該像前作」會是個公平的評估。就像我曾開玩笑說的，如果我們就只是弄來
兩隻Archdemons並稱之為一個超級blight，我想我們會看到一樣多的負面反應。這歸結成
一個在相當程度上挑戰慣例的遊戲：它並不述說通常的奇幻故事、不呈現通常的奇幻戰鬥
，而這時它的確冒著這樣的風險：有人會說「哇，這真是太不一樣了，而我無法接受。」

Eurogamer: Is Dragon Age II better on PC?
Eurogamer: DA2在PC上更好嗎？

Mike Laidlaw: I wouldn't say so. We actually did extensive work to make sure
the experiences were much closer aligned. I would say the gulf between the
two was quite significant in Origins, simply because the consoles were
tackled second as opposed to concurrently with the PC. There's some amazing
visual work on PC - a high quality texture pack and DirectX 11 - and one that
nicely scales to the PC's stronger hardware. In terms of the way it controls
and the way it plays: the game's are quite identical, it's just that the
interface is different. 

我不會這麼說。我們做了廣泛的努力來確保(兩種平台的)經驗是更加一致的。我會說兩者
之間的鴻溝在Origins是很顯著的，這就只是因為遊樂器版是在PC之後而不是同時處理的
。在PC上面有一些驚人的視覺效果—高品質素材包和DirectX 11—這是出色地善用了PC更
強的硬體。說到它的操作與遊戲方式，(兩種版本的)遊戲是完全相同的，只是介面不一樣
。

The console experience doesn't fight itself as much as it did in Origins. The
targeting is smoother than Origins was by miles. The console versions now
have options like being able to pause and say, "Move to Point", so you can
position your archers. There's a greater degree of parity between the two.
Our goal was that it was always going to be personal preferences; you were
going to get a great experience on whichever platform you chose to play.

現在遊樂器版的體驗不像在Origins那樣勉強。目標瞄準更順暢的程度不可以道里計。遊
樂器版現在有選項讓你暫停並移動到定點，所以你可以調度你的角色。兩種版本之間有更
大程度的同等性。我們的目標是總是符合個人偏好；不論如何你都將會在你選擇的平台得
到很棒的體驗。

There's this strange perception that because the combat is faster -
characters leaping into place or charging forward - it's an inherently
console thing. We designed that because we thought that the ability to whirl
around and snap off a fireball at a guy who's charging you, rather than
shuffling in and launching it usually a couple of feet behind him, created a
much stronger sense of responsiveness. To me that benefits the PC players and
the console players.

有一種奇怪的觀察是，就因為戰鬥更快速—角色跳到定點或往前衝刺—所以這天生是款遊
樂器遊戲。我們這樣設計是因為我們認為四處橫掃並向朝你衝來的傢伙放一發火球，而不
是曳步前行並通常在他身後好幾呎發射，創造了更好的反應感。對我而言這對PC和遊樂器
玩家都有利。

Eurogamer: What do you say when people accuse Dragon Age II of being a
console game?
Eurogamer: 當人們指責DA2是一款遊樂器遊戲的時候，你會怎麼說？

Mike Laidlaw: There may be some element of... I guess it's fear that if the
PC has certain capabilities and they're not being used 100 per cent of the
way then the game must have inherently had things removed because of that. I
can understand that. I paid a fair amount of money for my gaming rig and I
love to be able to crank it up and push it up. But the simple truth is that
PC gaming has never been a platform of a single hardware spec. You've always
had to support both lower-end and higher-end PCs. You don't want to design a
game that cuts out everyone except the guy who bought his computer this month.

也許有某些因素的…我猜這是一種恐懼，認為PC有一些能力沒有被100%的使用的話，那這
款遊戲一定是天生就有一些東西因此被移除了。我可以理解這種想法。我花了一大筆錢買
遊戲配備，而且我喜愛調整它、催出它的能力。但有一個再簡單不過的事實：PC遊戲平台
從來都不是只有一種硬體組合。你總是必須支援低階和高階PC。你不會想要設計一款遊戲
是只能讓這個月買新電腦的人玩的，而擋掉其他所有人。

Origins had this legacy of being designed for PC. That was an early and
strong opening message when it was first announced in yesteryear, back when
we were working on Jade Empire, which was for console. There's definitely a
sense that if you didn't design it for PC only then there's some sense of
abandonment. Our goal was always to design a good game and move some sliders,
as it were, in terms of how fantasy RPGS are typically presented, both from a
story and combat standpoint. Doing that is not really a platform-specific
choice. 

Origins有著專為PC設計的特點。這在往年(Origins的開發計畫)發表的時候就是很早就強
打的首發資訊，那時我們還在開發設計給遊樂器的Jade Empire。當然會有一種感覺是說
，如果你不設計給PC，這就是一種遺棄。我們的目標一直都是要設計一款好遊戲，並在奇
幻RPG的傳統呈現方式上做些調整，不論在故事或戰鬥的角度都是如此。這種作法並不是
一個平台特定的選擇。

Eurogamer: Did Mass Effect influence the evolution of Dragon Age?
Eurogamer: Mass Effect有影響到DA的演化嗎？

Mike Laidlaw: Having technology in proximity for the conversation system
certainly had an influence on Dragon Age. We decided for Dragon Age II that
we wanted a voice for the player fairly early on and so there was an
obvious... Well, what would be the best system we have - readily accessible,
easily transported, writers who are familiar with it? And all of that made
that a very simple thing.

(Mass Effect)在對話系統上擁有相似的技術，這當然對DA有影響。我們很早就決定DA2的
玩家角色要有聲音，所以很明顯的…嗯，我們手頭有的最佳系統是甚麼呢—已經可用、移
植方便、寫作者也很熟悉？這都讓這件事變得很好決定。

In terms of other elements of Mass Effect influencing it: I wouldn't say so.
They're very, very different beasts - a cover-based shooter set in space is
going to be very different than a 'fantasy control four players at once with
a heavier tactical bent' kind of game. We certainly looked at the work Mass
did and all of us played it several times, but I wouldn't say it had a direct
influence other than the way we're doing the writing and player voice-over.

說到Mass Effect的其它元素的影響：我不會這麼說。它們是非常、非常不同的東西—以
掩護為主的太空射擊遊戲是會和「奇幻、同時控制四名角色、有強烈戰術傾向」的這種遊
戲非常不同的。我們當然看過Mass的成果，且我們全部都玩過好幾次，但我不會說它對我
們的寫作和玩家配音之外的因素有所影響。

Eurogamer: The Metacritic score for Dragon Age II (at the time of writing) is
82 per cent. Is that in-line with expectations?
Eurogamer: Metacritic給DA2的評分是82%。這符合期待嗎？

Mike Laidlaw: It's a little bit lower than we were expecting. We knew going
in that this may not sit around the same spot as Origins on all platforms (86
for the 360). There's been, I would say, more strongly negative reviews
appearing on Metacritic than I expected. I'm a little surprised by the 6/10s
and they have a fair amount of weight early on. If the Metacritic isn't where
we want it to be, and honestly our goal as a studio is to try and aim more
for 90, then our next step will be to, very easily, go through those reviews,
go through fan feedback, especially over some time - as opposed to the
day-one initial response - and look at that in a measured way and say, what
didn't work, what did work, where did we go too far, where did we not go far
enough, where was there just an inherent dissonance, and try to refine the
experience and try to move forward for any future products.

這比我們期待的低一些。我們知道這次可能不會在各平台都和Origins得到差不多的分數
(360是86)。我會說，Metacritic上面出現了比我預期還要多的強烈負面評論。我對那些
6/10的評價有點驚訝，而且它們在初期還蠻多的。如果Metacritic的評價不是我們想要的
，而且老實說我們工作室的目標是企圖瞄準90以上，那麼我們的下一步，很簡單，就是看
過那些評論，看過粉絲回響—特別是一段時間後的、而非僅是發售日當天的—以一個權衡
過的方式去看，然後評估，哪些(遊戲部分)有效果、哪些沒有，哪些我們過度操作，哪些
我們做得還不夠多，哪些地方就是有內在的不協調，然後試著改善遊戲體驗並向著未來的
產品邁進。

Honestly, it's always a learning process. Dragon Age II comes out of some
things we'd identified for Origins and anything we do in the future is going
to come out of this response to Dragon Age II.

老實說，這總是學習的過程。DA2參考了一些我們所認同的對Origins的回應，而未來我們
做的任何事情都將參考對DA2的回應。

Eurogamer: One stronger criticism levelled at Dragon Age II was that it was
designed by committee; it tried too hard to appeal too far and wide, and in
doing so it lost a sense of self. What do you say to that?
Eurogamer: 一個針對DA2的強烈批評是它是以委員會的方式製作的；它亟力想迎合的
事物太多，因此失去了自我。你對這有何看法？

Mike Laidlaw: Dragon Age II was designed by just the senior, core team.
Honestly I don't feel it's a game that's been designed to appeal far and wide
and so on. If it were, there were choices we could have made that would have
taken it much, much further. We would have probably simplified down to a
single character, maybe with companions; probably looked at doing some even
deeper changes to inventory management, making sure that... You wouldn't want
to confuse people with enchanting or anything complex like that. Really what
we wanted to do with the game, just talking about first-principles, was to
look at elements of Origins that were over complex and needlessly so and see
if we could pull those out in a clean way and didn't take out what I always
saw as core elements of the experience: strong, character-driven stories, and
the idea that the combat should be a party working together, especially at
higher difficulty levels.

DA2是僅由資深、核心團隊設計的。老實說我不認為它是一款設計來迎合各種事情之類的
遊戲。如果它是的話，我們會做出一些抉擇讓它走得比現在更遠得多。也許我們會簡化到
一個單一角色，也許有些同伴；也許試著對物品管理做些更深層的改變，確保…你不會想
要用附魔或類似複雜的東西來混淆玩家。只說到第一原則的話，我們真的想在這款遊戲中
做的，就是找出Origins中太複雜而不必要的元素，並看看我們能否將它們乾淨的去除而
不會拿掉我一向看作是遊戲體驗核心元素的事物：強烈而角色導向的故事、戰鬥應該是團
隊合作的概念(特別是在較高難度)。

Dragon Age II certainly made some changes but holds very true to what us as a
team sees as core tenets of the series. There's certainly refinement to do,
there's learnings to be had, but I don't think it loses as much of the
personality as it certainly could have.

DA2 的確作了一些改變，但仍維繫住我們這個團隊視為本系列核心宗旨的事物。當然有些
改善要做，有些事情該學，但我不認為他喪失了它確實該有的個性。

Eurogamer: Mass Effect 2 was a tour de force and, to an extent, Dragon Age II
has been cast in its shadow. Why do people consider Mass Effect 2 a better
game?

Mass Effect 2是個傑作，而某種程度上，DA2被它的陰影遮蓋。為什麼人們認為Mass
Effect 2是更好的遊戲？

Mike Laidlaw: If I were going to point at something and say 'well this is the
shadow', it's really the shadow of Origins. And with Origins it was the
shadow of Baldur's Gate II. Back in the day we certainly drew that comparison
ourselves. There's nothing wrong with that: you should absolutely be compared
to other projects within the same series for sure. But the expectations that
Origins created were of a more traditional, classic style of fantasy story
and a different pace in the combat, even though I think the fundamentals are
still the same.

如果我要指著一個東西然後說「嗯這就是陰影」，那實際上會是Origins的陰影。而
Origins則在Baldur’s Gate的陰影下。之前我們當然自己比較過它們。這沒甚麼不對：
你當然應該和同系列中的其他企畫進行比較。但是Origins創造的期待是更傳統、經典風
格的奇幻故事和一個不同的戰鬥步調，就算我認為基礎仍然是一樣的。

Eurogamer: Should people let go of the idea that Dragon Age is a
reincarnation of Baldur's Gate?
Eurogamer: 人們應該要放棄Dragon Age是Baldur’s Gate的化身的想法嗎？

Mike Laidlaw: I would say get rid of the idea it will be a re-hash. Getting
rid of Baldur's Gate is a terrible idea, it created some really fundamental
elements of what we've done with Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age II. It's
never going to be the same game every time out. We see Dragon Age as a story
about a place and a time, not just a singular story that continues through
games.

我會說去掉它(Dragon Age)會是(Baldur’s Gate)翻版的想法。去掉Baldur’s Gate是一
個糟透的點子，它創造了一些我們在DA:O和DA2使用的極為基礎的元素。每次上市的遊戲
永遠不會相同。我們把Dragon Age看作是一個在一時一地發生的故事，而不是在不同遊戲
之間延續的單一故事。

Eurogamer: Imported saves don't appear to do much in Dragon Age 2. Will they
be beefed up for Dragon Age 3?
Eurogamer: 上代破關存檔在DA2看起來沒甚麼作用。這會在DA3加強嗎？

Mike Laidlaw: Well the intent was to make sure it was used in a way that
makes sense for the story we're telling. We had access to virtually every
possible state or piece of data that came out of Origins, but what we
realised over time was there were elements that we were including that felt
honestly shoehorned in. It was the obligatory cameo and so on that didn't
make a lot of sense. The big thing we wanted to achieve with that import was
that there was a degree of homage paid, that the world still had the
appropriate information regarding who is the king of Ferelden, who is in
charge or Orzammar and so on. But in order to create earth-shattering new
story-arcs or huge, huge changes to the game from the import really does run
the risk of alienating people who didn't play the first game and were maybe
turned off by it.

嗯，我們的意圖是確保這些存檔是以合理的方式用在我們所講的故事中。我們曾經差不多
用到了從Origins帶來的每一則資訊，但慢慢我們意識到有些元素會讓人覺得是被硬塞進
去的。像是舊角色的強迫性客串之類不太有道理的東西。我們想要藉著輸入存檔達成的大
事是某個程度的致敬，例如這個世界對誰是Ferelden國王仍然有恰當資訊，誰掌控著
Orzammar之類的。但如果要用輸入存檔來創造驚天動地的新故事線或是超級巨大的改變的
話，這的確會冒著疏離新玩家的風險，也許因此而讓他們卻步。

I've certainly seen a fair amount of feedback that says, "I couldn't play
Origins, I thought it was too slow, the story was too plodding, too typical,
and Dragon Age II is awesome by comparison!" For those people we don't want
to create this swathe of content that is closed off and exclusive. We really
honestly were driven by what felt right for this story; would Hawke know
whether or not the Warden had worked with the Mage collective in Origins?
Well, I mean, we probably could have made that work but it would have felt
extremely artificial. In the long-term, the information that's included in
the end of Dragon Age II does include information from Origins, including
stuff that was only referenced very lightly - it's still encapsulated and
carries forward into the Dragon Age II save.

我確實已經看到蠻多回響說：「我無法玩Origins, 我覺得它太慢，且它的故事太蹣跚、
太典型，而DA2相較之下真是讚！」對這些人，我們不想創造一個封閉而排外的內容。我
們的確真誠的受故事的合理性督促；Hawke會知道Warden在Origins有沒有和法師集團合作
嗎？嗯，我的意思是，我們也許可以辦到，但這會顯得非常刻意。長遠來說，DA2結局包
含的資訊的確也包含來自Origins的資訊，包括一些只被輕輕點到的事情—它仍然被封裝
、推進到DA2的破關存檔中。




===========================

個人整理與感想：

必須先聲明我還沒有玩過DA2，只有玩過試玩版，因為我是DA:O死忠粉絲
而我實在被DA2的評價嚇到了。


首先，通篇讀下來，我第一個印象就是 Laidlaw 不愧是公關高手，
對一些綿裡藏針的問題，他常常用四平八穩的漂亮語句來將自己的立場中立化，
同時用引導性的話術來替自己的立場辯駁。例如:

        1. 說到DA2被指責為專為遊樂器設計，這是一個風格的問題，
        他居然說這大概是PC玩家擔心自己的配備沒有充分發揮--引導成硬體的問題。

        2. 說到6/10的評價，他指出DAO造成的反彈，再來卻說：若是延續DAO不會更好，
        因為故事就大概會被搞成一個老套的超級blight。(誰要你這樣設計啊...)

        3. 說到Dragon Age到底是不是柏德之門精神繼承者的問題，
        他居然回答 "DA不是柏德之門的翻版(rehash)" 。(誰覺得它會是翻版啊...)


再者，我發現美式RPG死忠玩家的擔憂，丟給Mike Laidlaw之後，
照這篇文章的回答，好像都可以翻譯成這樣的語句： (假設RPG死忠玩家的擔心是X)
"你甚麼時候有了 X 的幻覺？"

        1. 你甚麼時候有了 DA 系列是以 PC 為核心的幻覺？ (平台問題)
        2. 你甚麼時候有了 DA2 以延續 DAO 故事為主的幻覺？(存檔繼承問題)
        3. 你什麼時候有了 RPG 有不可更動元素的幻覺？(DA2是否改過頭的問題)


整篇讀完，我讀到很多很多的妥協；似乎美式RPG對他而言只是一個歷史名詞，
現在他要製作的遊戲是以開發新市場--主要是遊樂器市場--為主要導向。
也就是節奏明快、系統簡單、整體設計理念盡量取在PC與遊樂器的中間值，
而且遊戲內的資訊總是使新玩家也毫無障礙為主。

他對美式RPG的概念似乎極為模糊-- "角色導向的故事+團隊合作的戰鬥"，
卻隻字不提操作系統，但這好像才是老玩家最在意的地方吧？
(所以他對任何評論都很開心，唯獨就是完全無法理解6/10是怎麼蹦出來的)

翻完之後，我更加確定，要買DA2就先在心裡自動屏蔽DAO再說...

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 218.160.178.138
※ 編輯: antiflunk       來自: 218.160.178.138      (05/31 01:07)
※ 編輯: antiflunk       來自: 218.160.178.138      (05/31 01:10)
推 tony780504:請他去做動作遊戲   不要毀了DA  唉...
→ tony780504:希望DA3會記取教訓  我很喜歡DA的世界觀呢  不要爛掉
→ tony780504:阿
推 deepseas:補上一個他最近在官網的帖子http://ppt.cc/EM(b 其他不評
推 mikejr:看一半正想說這公關稿真是超級政客的 就被原po說了 XD
→ mikejr:Mike:有問題都不是我們的問題 是你們的問題 XD
→ mikejr:雖然說像這種公關稿也不可能唱衰自己就是了 會影響銷路...
推 deepseas:所以當初某編劇會變得那麼低調不是沒有原因的......
→ deepseas:如果連他在內另外兩名都離開了，我想我會立刻放棄某些事
推 Slime:Mike: 我們成功設計了一場災難, 我們都很興奮並期待它蔓延
推 deepseas:                    Blight
→ antiflunk:嗯...他的頭像選得很好= = 故意的嗎? 從開頭看來他有被
→ antiflunk:刺激到，而且還蠻大的，希望這是一個好的開始。
推 SSamuel:恩...今天天氣很好
→ kaj1983:遊戲很普通，但公關稿挺成功的XDDD
推 RushMonkey:這傢伙講話模式怎麼那麼像最新一集惡魔哭的製作人....
推 Arctica:真是強大的政客性質回答.....
推 zippa:我X 還我1300 T_T
推 efreet:他的頭像...只能說不意外XD
推 typepeter:政客~