33 réponses à ce sujet

[Ecael]

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

Ecael wrote...

The only major decisions in Dragon Age consisted of "Should I help this person, or should I kill them?" Templars/Mages, Elves/Werewolves, Golems/Dwarves only affected what little cutscene you saw at the end and what units you could summon at the boss. Voice acting, graphics and cinematics affect how linear the game can be and are the limiting factors to making decisions and facing consequences.

Well gosh when you simplify the decisions like that then sure, but they were far more complex than that.

No, they weren't. The only reason why it felt like you had an effect on the ending was because the epilogue was pure text with no cinematics, graphics or voice acting. All the decisions you listed lead to the same result - you complete your quest, you move on, you get a minimal army to kill the final boss, and then you read the dynamic epilogue.

[Kothoses Rothenkisal]

CD projekt Red made the witcher and are my great white hope, that and ToR, I am hoping that an MMO budget allows bioware to make massive non linear RPG with the current technological excellence and production values that they invest in the single players.



But the single player RPG is gradually being erroded into an action RPG with narrative, its an evolution of the game to match the audience, if you handed most modern gamers a copy of Planescape Torment or BG 2 the fact is they would baulk at the difficulty of them, be antagonized by the limited inventory space and micro management elements and switch off to reading text.



Its not Biowares fault, its the fact that they are a commercial company and they have to change their game design to the climate of gamer they wish to appeal to.



CD Projekt red and Obsidian dont have the same overheads to recoup so can take a few more risks, Obsidian may one day learn how to code rather than making what are basically bioware games without the high production values. CD Projekt red are still working with small enough budgets to be able to take risks.



what i really want to see is a successor to NWN with the community element, hell I would PAY a subscription fee for a revival of the NWN community with an updated game and engine and professionally hosted servers that GMs could house modules on.

[zazei]

Ecael wrote...

zazei wrote...

Jestina wrote...

True RPG's don't really exist anymore. Every year it becomes harder and harder to find them.

This is sadly how I feel more or less.
If Mass effect 3 doesn't at least fix some of the problems many of us had with that game and Dragon Age 2 turns down the same road as ME2 went I think I will more or less give up on Bioware. Think they are reaching a point where there games really are not that enjoyable anymore for me. Still have faith in Obsidian and that wierd company that made the Witcher if they ever decide to let us play something more then a macho witcher guy though. ^^

Obsidian tried releasing an action RPG (Alpha Protocol) and it's barely keeping up with the sales of Dragon Age: Awakening (which is 10% of Dragon Age's Origins sales).

So while you can give up on BioWare, there aren't many alternatives left.

Obsidian somehow do seem to survive though despite all the flames they gotten over the years. I would point out however that Alpha Protocol probably didn't cost as much as what Bioware put into a game and I honestly liked it. Yes many people didn't but as long as Obsidian continues to somehow survive there is hope I think and only Obsidian themselves could really say how well they are pulling along. After that it's just mmorpg's that are the future until tastes chance and things swing back a little I think. Bioware really do seem to be hitting a point where there games will lose everything I found appealing about them. Action RPGs are fine. Action RPG's that is just a action game with some dialog is not something I will ever pay for.

Amusingly enough I have more hope for Bioware's MMORPG to deliver the kind of experiance I like from a singleplayer game then their Singleplayer games.

Modifié par zazei, 08 juillet 2010 - 07:24 .

[MaVel2iCk]

Its not Biowares fault, its the fact that they are a commercial company and they have to change their game design to the climate of gamer they wish to appeal to.

.

True enough, but they aren't making bootlegs on 1st avenue. This is always a company that's considered games more of a narrative and an art, a company that's dared to test the waters in lieu of summing up "what works" to hit profit maximization.

On that note, DA: O was a great commercial success and was received well on many fronts. I read more positive about DA:O than I did negative... It was far from being a diamond in the rough, and if ME: 2 got the looks then DA: O got the brains. The great thing about having multiple franchises is that they can target multiple player bases and diversify their holdings. It's generally not a good thing to release multiple games in close succession that will compete with one another. 

[Jonp382]

Ecael wrote...

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

Ecael wrote...

The only major decisions in Dragon Age consisted of "Should I help this person, or should I kill them?" Templars/Mages, Elves/Werewolves, Golems/Dwarves only affected what little cutscene you saw at the end and what units you could summon at the boss. Voice acting, graphics and cinematics affect how linear the game can be and are the limiting factors to making decisions and facing consequences.

Well gosh when you simplify the decisions like that then sure, but they were far more complex than that.

No, they weren't. The only reason why it felt like you had an effect on the ending was because the epilogue was pure text with no cinematics, graphics or voice acting. All the decisions you listed lead to the same result - you complete your quest, you move on, you get a minimal army to kill the final boss, and then you read the dynamic epilogue.

But how did you get to that result? Do you not care about the role-playing itself?

[Ecael]

Jonp382 wrote...

Ecael wrote...

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

Ecael wrote...

The only major decisions in Dragon Age consisted of "Should I help this person, or should I kill them?" Templars/Mages, Elves/Werewolves, Golems/Dwarves only affected what little cutscene you saw at the end and what units you could summon at the boss. Voice acting, graphics and cinematics affect how linear the game can be and are the limiting factors to making decisions and facing consequences.

Well gosh when you simplify the decisions like that then sure, but they were far more complex than that.

No, they weren't. The only reason why it felt like you had an effect on the ending was because the epilogue was pure text with no cinematics, graphics or voice acting. All the decisions you listed lead to the same result - you complete your quest, you move on, you get a minimal army to kill the final boss, and then you read the dynamic epilogue.

But how did you get to that result? Do you not care about the role-playing itself?

You could ask the same question after the ending of Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2.

For some people, the game is only as open-ended as they want them to be.

Modifié par Ecael, 08 juillet 2010 - 07:54 .

[Sago_mulch]

Ecael wrote...

As I posted before...

The RPG everyone is nostalgic about hasn't existed ever since they introduced:

• Full voice acting with lip-sync
  
  
• Realistic graphics with facial expressions and uncanny valley humans
  
  
• Immersive cinematic cutscenes
  
  
• In-depth romanceable characters/companions (in both personality and looks)
  
  
  
• Console ports.

The writers will always be limited to how much all those listed above will cost (and how much time it will take) for all the other dev teams to produce.

This started to occur since Knights of the Old Republic was released and will continue as long as people expect everything in that list above.

Don't start whining now over what has already been happening in the last 7 years.

CHECK NUMBER 13

[Distantgeek]

I'm enjoying DA2, but DAO was as better structured RPG. Designing the game for consoles and "porting" it to PC just means dumbing the game down so button mashers will play it.

So far, I haven't been able to avoid any conflict without violence. There's no persuade skill, so you're stuck fighting ALL the time. That's action/adventure, not RPG

That said, the story is fantastic, and the way your party mates have their own duties outside of being grouped with you is a great idea. Actually rising up in social status and all that. Great. It just sucks to see it dumbed down for consoles. No toolset? That's a slap in the face to the modders out there. Hopefully DA3 will be more RPG-centric.

[Xaltar81]

Sadly it is too early for this type of thread. A lot of people are still stuck in one mode or the other. Either they are determindly criticising the changes or they are vehiemently standing up for them. It seems very few are willing to look at the game in its parts and debate what is good and what is not. If we could all talk about the positve and negative elements and form conclusions as to what both sides can agree on as being worthwhile having in the next installment we may actually see a game that both sides can enjoy come Dragon age 3. As it stands right now, those that cried the loudest about DA:O have in large part got thier wish with DA2, while some don't like what they asked for now, most are happy with thier new neutered watered down version of DA:O. The problem is that the praises did not shout as loud as the complaints at DA:Os release and beyond and as a result, a lot of us have been cut out of the marketing picture almost entirely.

While I do appreciate that the people who lobbied for these changes have a right to an opinion and to want to have the developer improve thier play experience those same people need to realise that thier precious changes came at a huge cost to the rest of us. I am pleased to see that Bioware made changes based on the feedback of some of the community, that is the Bioware I think we can all agree we know and love. The OP has many valid points and some not so valid. The point is, we need to be vocal about what we want to see in our RPGs, particularly the DA franchise in this case.

We should not be insulting eachother for our different opinions, rather we should be looking for common ground to put forward. Things like this can make a profound difference to the development of future titles and by extention to thier success as a whole. Some say the style of DA2 is better than origins, I for one would like to see a detailed breakdown of how they come to that conclusion, I found the RPG elements sorely lacking in my mere 8 hour stint but please do enlighten us as to what u did to enjoy the content so much more than the rest of us. I will gladly concede valid points, as of right now however I am not even going to buy this game when its price drops, it has dissapointed me that much. I would love nothing more than to discover that my views are coloured negative due to the changes and that I have somehow missed the very elements I feel are lacking. So please guys, rather than throw around insults and childish remarks, get into some detail about your likes and dislikes. Please do try and adhere to the no spoilers rule while you are doing it.

Modifié par Xaltar81, 10 mars 2011 - 10:18 .