559 réponses à ce sujet

[Vicious]

Seriously? What elitist garbage.

That's what this thread is about. Video game companies don't often cater to their most LOLHARDCORE fans, because they are the minority.



To hell with em, I say, but I will add that Dragon Age is utterly casual. Any idiot can pick it up, play it, and succeed.



To call Dragon Age 'hardcore' is some elitist snobbery. The game is anything but.

[Gaxhung]

Elith wrote...

Sadly what people have missed is the fact games are constantly being made more casual, maybe for the better in some cases, but does no one remember the good old days where if you died near the end of a level in a game you were kicked back to the start? And when you finally finished the game, or level or whatever you were overcome with a sense of achievment?

You just described Demon's Souls (PS3) in a nutshell.

Actually in many ways Super Mario Galaxy is like that too, well the last 1/4. And that is on what platform? Wiii...eeeeee!

[Tirigon]

wowpwnslol wrote...

Can you stop with the retarded posts already? Everything you posted so far was utter trash. Go back to your console and keep out of PC gaming. Kids like you ruined it enough.

I have a hard time not calling you a retarded SOB now, really. YOU are the one posting utter trash, and the fact that I don´t even own a console just proves me right.


Edit: Lol I just noticed your name.... And YOU call ME kid? Are you serious man? Go back to playing your uber-hardcore WoW and pwn a few "Angry Ragepigs" that´s more on your level than a discussion.

Modifié par Tirigon, 06 juin 2010 - 11:34 .

[Sidney]

Vicious wrote...

To hell with em, I say, but I will add that Dragon Age is utterly casual. Any idiot can pick it up, play it, and succeed.

To call Dragon Age 'hardcore' is some elitist snobbery. The game is anything but.

...and what would be a "hardcore" RPG bu that measure?

Seriously, assuming you can read you can blow through most RPG's - and here you can insert your smug comments on literacy. I know BG2 is the holy grail but there is nothing an average person couldn't get about that game and whip up on it because assuming you can point and click you are money. Same is true of Fallout- the old "non-casualized" ones even. Success isn't an issue in most games. The complexity of RPG's isn't in their game mechanics which can, in
fairness, be called arcane but largely meaningless to most players
because the game handles all that Byzantine logic behind the scenes.

The complexity comes out of the story which might be more than some folks want to put up with - my shooter friends who hate ME2 can't stand how slow it moves for example - but that has nothing to do with pick it up and suceed.

[AlanC9]

Sidney wrote...
I know BG2 is the holy grail but there is nothing an average person couldn't get about that game and whip up on it because assuming you can point and click you are money. Same is true of Fallout- the old "non-casualized" ones even. Success isn't an issue in most games. The complexity of RPG's isn't in their game mechanics which can, in 
fairness, be called arcane but largely meaningless to most players
because the game handles all that Byzantine logic behind the scenes.

This is maybe true for Fallout -- all you have to do is pump Small Guns and shoot at the eyes - but it isn't completely true for BG2. You do have to remember a few things about the spell system. Chaotic Commands blocks Chaos spells and psionic blast, Breach dispels physical protections but only if you've nuked magic protections first, etc. Point and click won't quite get the job done.

I don't find these things even moderately challenging, but I think there are players who would

[wanderon]

I agree that not just any random gamer (with no D&D background) could pick up BG2 and not have any difficulty succeeding (assuming core level difficulty perhaps) but BG1 would probably be even more difficult for a larger percentage of random gamers than BG2.



This is especially so in the first half of the game since you are almost certain to stumble upon enemies that are too difficult for your level (assuming you are not just following a walkthrough and are playing for the first time) and most gamers are pretty unlikely to take the sane option and just run away at that point and come back later.

[Relshar]

I prefered ME1 over ME2 and realy hope DA2 wont go the same route as ME2.

If it turns out to be a diablo clone with conversation tacked on then I wont be buying it. ME2 was basicaly Gears of War with some RPG elements in it.

[Tirigon]

wanderon wrote...

I agree that not just any random gamer (with no D&D background) could pick up BG2 and not have any difficulty succeeding (assuming core level difficulty perhaps) but BG1 would probably be even more difficult for a larger percentage of random gamers than BG2.

This is especially so in the first half of the game since you are almost certain to stumble upon enemies that are too difficult for your level (assuming you are not just following a walkthrough and are playing for the first time) and most gamers are pretty unlikely to take the sane option and just run away at that point and come back later.

Maybe it will start hard. But then... It took me 20 hours until I found DAO manageable on easy, because I had never played an RPG before but only hack´n´slash. By now I´m bored on nightmare because it´s too easy.

For a game to be hard it should be hard after you played through 3 or 4 times, at least. If it´s only hard on your first playthrough that simply means the game mechanics are poorly explained.

[wanderon]

Tirigon wrote...

wanderon wrote...

I agree that not just any random gamer (with no D&D background) could pick up BG2 and not have any difficulty succeeding (assuming core level difficulty perhaps) but BG1 would probably be even more difficult for a larger percentage of random gamers than BG2.

This is especially so in the first half of the game since you are almost certain to stumble upon enemies that are too difficult for your level (assuming you are not just following a walkthrough and are playing for the first time) and most gamers are pretty unlikely to take the sane option and just run away at that point and come back later.

Maybe it will start hard. But then... It took me 20 hours until I found DAO manageable on easy, because I had never played an RPG before but only hack´n´slash. By now I´m bored on nightmare because it´s too easy.

For a game to be hard it should be hard after you played through 3 or 4 times, at least. If it´s only hard on your first playthrough that simply means the game mechanics are poorly explained.

In an RPG the ease of playing once you have done it already is not just a matter of mechanics - it's knowing where the enemy is and what they are likely to do and the total loss of surprise (allowing you to prepare yourself for what lies ahead) - not to mention knowing where the story is going and whats going to come next.

[Tirigon]

wanderon wrote...

In an RPG the ease of playing once you have done it already is not just a matter of mechanics - it's knowing where the enemy is and what they are likely to do and the total loss of surprise (allowing you to prepare yourself for what lies ahead) - not to mention knowing where the story is going and whats going to come next.

I do not know if this is supposed to contradict or agree with what I said.

If I assume you want to disagree I have to say that difficulty that comes purely out of the fact that you didn´t know there is a trap that insta-kills your meelees in the next room is not the way a game should challenge you. That´s why I hate the Cutscene-to-fight moments in DAO. What am I supposed to do if my mage PC stands 2 metres away from the enemy who starts with a knockdown or stun before I have even time to cast?

[Arttis]

Look if you want hardcore have the hardest mode disable your ability to save and you only get half of the automatic saves in the game.I am sure Bioware can make it hard on you.Then make another mode have the exact same level of difficulty minus the disabled saves.Then have your normal,easy.hard,etc,etc.

Easy fix.

[Rixxencaxx]

well just my 2 cents
i suppose that when people talk about "casualization" of dragon age thinks about the lack of complexity.
For example if i need to think about a good strategy to win against an enemy i feel rewarded when i finally kill him, if i just can use cone of cold to win against him then that game is a lot simplified for a larger audience.
Hack n slash means that the only thing you need to kill an enemy is to push your left mouse button. Dragon age after patches and especially expansions is really going into the direction of this kind of gameplay.
The entire game market is goind towards a single hybrid genre based of Push Crush Kill and Destroy.
Just a question for developers....why people likes so much indie games?? games with poor graphics but great game mechanics??
Why retrogaming is becoming so popular?
IMHO just one word "challenge"

Modifié par Rixxencaxx, 06 juin 2010 - 04:59 .

[Tirigon]

Arttis wrote...

Look if you want hardcore have the hardest mode disable your ability to save and you only get half of the automatic saves in the game.I am sure Bioware can make it hard on you.Then make another mode have the exact same level of difficulty minus the disabled saves.Then have your normal,easy.hard,etc,etc.
Easy fix.

That only challenges your luck and your PC because crashes ruin your progress.

The "Don´t save!" stuff is not really challenging it´s only annoying.

[Sidney]

AlanC9 wrote...

This is maybe true for Fallout -- all you have to do is pump Small Guns and shoot at the eyes - but it isn't completely true for BG2. You do have to remember a few things about the spell system. Chaotic Commands blocks Chaos spells and psionic blast, Breach dispels physical protections but only if you've nuked magic protections first, etc. Point and click won't quite get the job done.

I don't find these things even moderately challenging, but I think there are players who would

All that comes into play about what 3 times when you fight liches, because other than that even people who cast some sort of protection can be taken down in some form or fashion and with mind flayers those guys getting their brains zapped was just the price of doing business for me. It was only the liches I recall having to dink about with the proper order of those spells.

I'd also argue that in this case "hardcore" and "so horribly designed they should be beaten" seem to overlap. This does seem to fit because the whiners in the ME forums crying over the loss of the inventory system also seem to want the badly designed to return.

I've never hit an RPG that was "hard" to pickup. One big reason I play RPG's is because I'm so bad at games that do require skill to play - shooters, sports game and driving games. I'm universally bad at all those because their twitch factor is too high for me while the "point and die" implentation of RPG's is just right. Put another way, a CoD player will have a much bigger chance of surviving in DAO/BG/FO than I have in CoD. They might get bored and not like how "slow" the game is nor get wrapped up in the story, characters and setting but can they beat the game, much easier than I can beat their game.

[Arttis]

Tirigon wrote...

Arttis wrote...

Look if you want hardcore have the hardest mode disable your ability to save and you only get half of the automatic saves in the game.I am sure Bioware can make it hard on you.Then make another mode have the exact same level of difficulty minus the disabled saves.Then have your normal,easy.hard,etc,etc.
Easy fix.

That only challenges your luck and your PC because crashes ruin your progress.

The "Don´t save!" stuff is not really challenging it´s only annoying.

well taking money from a casino is no question hard because of your chances and luck.
As far as i can tell the Really hardcore elitists want the annoying things back.
Besides play console is you want less crashing lol.At least the consoles have that little bit over PC.

[Tirigon]

Arttis wrote...


As far as i can tell the Really hardcore elitists want the annoying things back.

That´s why I don´t like hardcore games....

[Arrtis]

Tirigon wrote...

Arttis wrote...


As far as i can tell the Really hardcore elitists want the annoying things back.

That´s why I don´t like hardcore games....

well it seems to me that there would a be a second difficulty that is the same as the hardest except it lets you save.:PJust an extra option that can be easily made to shut the hardcore players up.

[Sinferno]

A game that has a hardcore difficulty needs to be balanced. Games nowadays arn't balanced and have the scale tipping to noob friendly instead of head pops off due to frustration. If a game is frustrating, but the developers did not take the time to balance the game, then the game is not worth the frustration to many players and the players will not play it. If the game is easy most players will play it all the way through which means that when the developers come out with a second game that adds on to the first story, the players who played the first game and completed it will buy the second game. The easy difficulty ensures that players will beat the first game and will  buy the second especially if they wern't frustrated and ejoyed the game. Its all about the money not nessessarily the art as it used to be.

 Starcraft. one of the most balanced games of all time, will likely have a Hard game option in single player. Starcraft is a competitive game and  Blizzard will take their time to make hard "hard" while keeping it fun therefore players will enjoy the difficulty because its generally well-balanced game. Games like Biowares DAO is not balanced at all and is tipped to noob friendly. Nightmare and other hardmodes arn't balanced as well therefore there game is easy because thats what the developers wanted it to be. Balanced difficulty makes games stronger and enhances its replayability and the games overall qaulity and not having these options for the hardcore player base discourages the player to learn how to be the best at that specific game. Game makers these days don't encourage you to be super super good at their game they just want you to complete it and buy the next one.

[edit] Dragon Age 2 will be casualized. The reason it will be casualized is because there will be more DLC's and more content that will come out after it and if players get frustrated and arn't enjoying it at all times then thats a chance that player as well as others will not buy the DLC's. It is also a second installment to the first DOA so it will be the same and attract the same audience that enjoys a good story and a easy game. Players do not like unfamiliar things. Balancing a game takes time. More time then Feb. 11, 2011.
 
Us hardcore players will need to look elsewhere instead of hoping a good dangerous story, which everyone likes, will acually be as dangerous as the game makes it out to be instead of just showing up and one shotting it because everyones so good at completing games on Nightmare.


 

Modifié par Sinferno, 07 juin 2010 - 12:12 .

[Arrtis]

I say you are wrong!

[Sinferno]

Arrtis wrote...

I say you are wrong!

A game being so easy that it ensures everyone that buys it will complete the game and never be frustrated by difficulty so that it will encourage players to buy the next installments? Sounds about right to me.

Modifié par Sinferno, 07 juin 2010 - 12:09 .

[Arrtis]

Sinferno wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

I say you are wrong!

A game being so easy that it ensures everyone that buys it will complete the game and never be frustrated by difficulty so that it will encourage players to buy the next installments? Sounds about right to me.

Your free to believe whatever you want.

Modifié par Arrtis, 07 juin 2010 - 12:19 .

[Sinferno]

Arrtis wrote...

Sinferno wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

I say you are wrong!

A game being so easy that it ensures everyone that buys it will complete the game and never be frustrated by difficulty so that it will encourage players to buy the next installments? Sounds about right to me.

Your free to believe whatever you want.

Thanks, i was hoping that you would reply as to why you think i'm wrong but knowing that its ok to believe whatever i want is pretty good too haha

[AlanC9]

Sidney wrote...


All that comes into play about what 3 times when you fight liches, because other than that even people who cast some sort of protection can be taken down in some form or fashion and with mind flayers those guys getting their brains zapped was just the price of doing business for me. It was only the liches I recall having to dink about with the proper order of those spells.

Wow -- I thought I was being controversial for saying IE games aren't difficult as RPGs go. 

Brains getting eaten wasn't the problem with mind flayers so much as confusion from the psi blasts. But if you don't mind resurrecting a couple of people every battle, it's no big deal.

I've never hit an RPG that was "hard" to pickup. One big reason I play RPG's is because I'm so bad at games that do require skill to play - shooters, sports game and driving games. I'm universally bad at all those because their twitch factor is too high for me while the "point and die" implentation of RPG's is just right. Put another way, a CoD player will have a much bigger chance of surviving in DAO/BG/FO than I have in CoD. They might get bored and not like how "slow" the game is nor get wrapped up in the story, characters and setting but can they beat the game, much easier than I can beat their game.

Don't sell your own abilities short. Plenty of people have posted about finding DA difficult. 

[AlanC9]

Sinferno wrote...

A game that has a hardcore difficulty needs to be balanced. Games nowadays arn't balanced and have the scale tipping to noob friendly instead of head pops off due to frustration. If a game is frustrating, but the developers did not take the time to balance the game, then the game is not worth the frustration to many players and the players will not play it. If the game is easy most players will play it all the way through which means that when the developers come out with a second game that adds on to the first story, the players who played the first game and completed it will buy the second game. The easy difficulty ensures that players will beat the first game and will  buy the second especially if they wern't frustrated and ejoyed the game. Its all about the money not nessessarily the art as it used to be.

It was ever about the art?

[Bryy_Miller]

Tirigon wrote...

Elith wrote...

Sadly what people have missed is the fact games are constantly being made more casual, maybe for the better in some cases, but does no one remember the good old days where if you died near the end of a level in a game you were kicked back to the start? And when you finally finished the game, or level or whatever you were overcome with a sense of achievment?

That sucks. Games are for fun; if you want to achieve something, do an important job and achieve something in that.....

Let's put this in the context of television. Rather, let us put this in the context of the 2007 WGA Strike.
Would you, Tirigon, be one of those mindless dolts saying "who cares about the writers, television is supposed to be entertainment, if you want to a story, read a book"?