187 réponses à ce sujet

[DariusTrue]

flem1 wrote...

ME2 may be the best game Bio has ever made.

That has nothing to do with the way DA2 should play, however. The two franchises are different in design objectives as well as setting -- or so we were told.

And that's what this thread's supposed to be about, not which game is better, but how they shouldn't be the same.

[L0ckd0wn325]

Wish i could buy a GOOD PC. XD

[haberman13]

Maniac600 wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

All the side quests used the same dungeons.

In ME 2 you have some N7 missions, random hub missions and 10 loyalty quests. ALl with different levels

I agree. ME 2 didn't have the open world that ME 1 did, but what's the point of an open world if there's not much in it? ME 1 was fun but it had a lot of room to improve.

In my opinion they did the opposite of "improve" for ME2 in all but the combat.

ME2 combat > ME1
ME2 cutscenes > ME1

ME1 > ME2 for everything else

[troyk890]

Helena Tylena wrote...

YokoFactor wrote...

Again, we don't know much about this game yet. How many of these topics do we need, exactly? :<

I must ask: why do people say we shouldn't speculate in a forum designed for speculation? What are you even doing here if you're not interested in the thoughts the community has on this?

I'm not saying you should leave, your reaction simply coloured me... curious.

Speculating is fine, but making assumtions that the game is getting "ME2'd" based on a couple of vaque PR lines isn't speculation. It's just making crap up and then complaining about something you have no evidence for, just because you've convinced yourself its true.

Not saying you're doing this, just explaining why people are getting tired of it.

[BonusGG]

Valmy wrote...

L0ckd0wn325 wrote...

Mass effect 2 was no fun. It was a third-person shooter. Hardly any RPG elements in it. Yea ME1's RPG elements weren't perfect but at least they were there.

Yeah I guess I don't see a small number of skills for tons of skill points being anymore there than ME2s small number of skills for tons of skill points.

I fail to see how the RPG elements were any more or less in either game.  They were almost entirely the same game.

Adding points to attributes obviously is the only thing that makes a game truly "role-playing"

[haberman13]

L0ckd0wn325 wrote...

Wish i could buy a GOOD PC. XD

Its times like this I wish UPS was free ... I have a "good" PC just sitting not being used (and never will) because of a recent upgrade.

I would love nothing more than to share the goodness of PC gaming with the world <3

[Valmy]

BonusGG wrote...
Adding points to attributes obviously is the only thing that makes a game truly "role-playing"

Is this a joke?  Anyway you did not have attributes in ME1 either only skills and you had them again in ME2.

[BostonVamp]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Valmy wrote...

DariusTrue wrote...

I'd just really like Dragon Age to keep what made it special, instead of make it Mass Effect with swords and spells.

This.  Nobody wants to see DA become ME and not because some of us did not love ME.

I agree with this line of reasoning

THIS! Captured my feelings exactly. I don't want to play Dragon Effect 2.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Mecha Tengu wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

"

ME2 plot was:
t

You are wrong about the daddy issues, those were side quests

[Maniac600]

haberman13 wrote...

Maniac600 wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

All the side quests used the same dungeons.

In ME 2 you have some N7 missions, random hub missions and 10 loyalty quests. ALl with different levels

I agree. ME 2 didn't have the open world that ME 1 did, but what's the point of an open world if there's not much in it? ME 1 was fun but it had a lot of room to improve.

In my opinion they did the opposite of "improve" for ME2 in all but the combat.

ME2 combat > ME1
ME2 cutscenes > ME1

ME1 > ME2 for everything else

ME 1 the inventory was bloated and hard to deal with
ME 2 there was no real inventory, just heavy weapons and research improvements. Much more streamlined and easier.

ME 1 nearly every non-storyline world you went to was terrestrial and barren (and boring)
ME 2 worlds were at least a little more interesting, with (usually) some form of decoration and environment to discern worlds apart.

ME 1 dialogue was tedious and irritating (IMO)
ME 2 you could interrupt and beat the crap out of people for talking too much.

Did I miss anything?

[Valmy]

DariusTrue wrote...
And that's what this thread's supposed to be about, not which game is better, but how they shouldn't be the same.

The implication I got was that ME2 was this horrible pervesion of the glory that was ME1 and they are going do something similar to DAO.

But yeah I think everybody agrees that ME is ME and we want DA to be DA.

[Larryboy_Dragon]

BonusGG wrote...

Let's all remember what RPG stands for before we start talking about how "ME 2 was barely an RPG."

RPG = Role-Playing Game

That said, the majority of that phrase is Role-Playing. The ME series is one where you take a role and your choices actually change things about the world around you. You play a role and it has lasting effects on the universe based on decision you, personally, got to make. If that's not the definition of role-playing, I don't know what is.

Basically, arbitrarily being able to add a 1 to a stat is not role-playing. D&D, the original RPG, had the players do both things. Still, when it came down to it, you spent more time making decisions that affected where you were going, how your party and NPCs felt about you, etc, than you did deciding where to add 1 attribute/skill point.

RPG is a nebulous term, and while I agree with the essence of what you are saying, I think that RPG also implies a level of character development that ME2 lacks. The differences between weapons, armor and skills levels are so small that I often can’t tell the difference.
You don’t see massive posts dedicated to serious discussion of  ME2 character builds, because once you’ve picked your class the details don’t really matter.
This is all irrelevant anyhow – I loved ME2. It didn’t have the allure of finding awesome weapon/armor upgrades or obtaining an awesome new skill like most RPGs have, but it is by far the most polished thing that Bioware have ever made.
I do consider the game to be a FPS/Adventure rather then a FPS/RPG, but genres are bullcrap anyhow.
The concern that most people have with the idea of DA2 becoming ME2ish is that Mass Effect was always supposed to be a series of action-RPGs, while Dragon Age was supposed to be more traditional. Terms like ‘dynamic action that puts you in the combat’ seems to indicate that DA2 is to become more mass-market orientated.

[Haexpane]

Maniac600 wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

The storyline of KOTOR was basically

"You have potential"
"Bastilla can influence fighting forces"
"Malak is attacking everything"
"We'll make you a Jedi to track down Malak"
"ZOMG PLOT TWIST AWESOME"
"Bastilla jumps ship"
"You kill Malak/and or Bastilla"

You know what else?

KOTOR was a great game.

People confuse surprising plot twsits w/ "good story"

Most great stories in literature are not surprising at all.  In fact, shocking twists are usually the result of cheap tropes and lazy writing.

What made the KOTOR story great was not the twists, it was the CHARACTERS, their interactions, how they reacted to events.

Catcher in the Rye is an example.  Nothing really shocking or surprising in that story, but one of the most important stories ever told in this century

[jableskage]

oh **** do you think they will make us mine in DA2? Oh god that was the worst part in ME2!!!



"you have to mine ore to make the best Weapons/Armour etc...



NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Onyx Jaguar]

Well yeah if you like Catcher in the Rye then we obviously aren't going to see eye to eye. Reading about the thoughts of a little whiny ****** for 200 pages impacted me so much on life, that I am now a changed person.

[Haexpane]

Valmy wrote...

L0ckd0wn325 wrote...

Mass effect 2 was no fun. It was a third-person shooter. Hardly any RPG elements in it. Yea ME1's RPG elements weren't perfect but at least they were there.

Yeah I guess I don't see a small number of skills for tons of skill points being anymore there than ME2s small number of skills for tons of skill points.

I fail to see how the RPG elements were any more or less in either game.  They were almost entirely the same game.

ME1 being the first, we got TEASED w/ some RPG elements.  SO we expected deeper more refined RPG elements in ME2

Don't get me wrong, I like ME2 (havent finished it) but the drastic shift from ME1 was unexpected and I still like ME1 more, a lot more

[Valmy]

Maniac600 wrote...
ME 2 there was no real inventory, just heavy weapons and research improvements. Much more streamlined and easier. 

Do not forget you could find new regular weapons that actually performed differently and shot differently.  I thought that was a brilliant way to bring inventory to a shooter/RPG game and not just get a gun with better stats.

[Haexpane]

Valmy wrote...

onotix wrote...
I LOVE YOU!

For trolling and insulting those of us who like ME2?  Yeah that was awesome.

quote one insult?  I never insulted you , please do not make  accusations like that while we are having a civil discussion.

[L0ckd0wn325]

My main point is that I really don't want DA2 to be dumbed-down.

[Maniac600]

Valmy wrote...

Maniac600 wrote...
ME 2 there was no real inventory, just heavy weapons and research improvements. Much more streamlined and easier. 

Do not forget you could find new regular weapons that actually performed differently and shot differently.  I thought that was a brilliant way to bring inventory to a shooter/RPG game and not just get a gun with better stats.

Yes, thanks for the reminder.

[DariusTrue]

Haexpane wrote...

Valmy wrote...

L0ckd0wn325 wrote...

Mass effect 2 was no fun. It was a third-person shooter. Hardly any RPG elements in it. Yea ME1's RPG elements weren't perfect but at least they were there.

Yeah I guess I don't see a small number of skills for tons of skill points being anymore there than ME2s small number of skills for tons of skill points.

I fail to see how the RPG elements were any more or less in either game.  They were almost entirely the same game.

ME1 being the first, we got TEASED w/ some RPG elements.  SO we expected deeper more refined RPG elements in ME2

Don't get me wrong, I like ME2 (havent finished it) but the drastic shift from ME1 was unexpected and I still like ME1 more, a lot more

Yeah, I was expecting a greater attachment to the character and the actions they take, but it really just felt like playing through a movie script.

[Onyx Jaguar]

ME 1 did have better pacing in some areas as there was no real change of pace outside of Planet Scanning in ME 2. But it did over rely on the Mako which made up a significant portion of the game.

[Haexpane]

L0ckd0wn325 wrote...
 

Hey, I play on the console and I also prefer more complex RPG's. 

Me 2, I play on PS3 mostly but have PC and XBOX360.

Baldur's Gate 2 is my fav "party based" RPG of all time.

Despite what the propaganda out there says, us console owners are not just dumb kids who like to mash buttons.

BTW Demon's Souls for the PS3 is 10X more complex than DA or ME

Sadly PUBLISHERS force developers to dumb things down because most console owners are indeed Halo/COD fans and 

BUT deep RPGs have always existed on consoles.   CHRONO TRIGGER for example from the way back

[Vicious]

ME1/2 owns.



DA2 will own even harder.



suck it, haters!