132 réponses à ce sujet

[epoch_]

I enjoy the challenge of games. When the gameplay is overly simplified to appeal to a wider audience, its just no where near as challenging or fun.

[Anathemic]

Wrathra wrote...

Yes, when by dropping some rpg elements the game is dumbed down to appeal to the twitchy fingered masses with the attention span of a turnip, like my beloved nephews, who have the shortest attention spans I've ever seen. 

"How can I skip all this talking?"

ugh.

This, this is what pisses me off when trying to get new people to try out the game, they care about combat and killing (Don't get me wrong I loved DA:O's combat system) more than the story.

[Kalfear]

pprrff wrote...

Can i just play the devil's advocate and ask why is it so bad for gaming company to try and find wider market appeal for its game? Sure there are hard core fan who love the tactical combat and pause the game every battle to set everything up and micromanage everything. This is perfectly fine.

But I think those things are mechanics, not the soul of RPG. They are a legacy when RPG combat is limited by technology. The soul of RPG is that people can escape into fantasy for couple hours a day and pretend to be someone else. Getting upset of RPG's combat mechanic is to me akin to getting upset over the way your christmas presents are wrapped. Your are mistaking the mechanics of unwrapping presents for the actual presents.

Now before I get insulted I would just like to say that I don't have problems with all the classic RPG traits that DAO had. It didn't bother me at all that you need to pause the game to set everything up properly.

Yes it is so bad because ME2 didnt successfully get a wider audience, they just replaced part of the audience with a new part and a real arguement can be made that they will have lost more when ME3 comes around then they had gained!

Bioware is a RPOG developer and thats why I buy Bioware games. PERIOD!

I dont go on twitch game develper websites demanding those devs cater to me and take real offence when whiny twitch players come here demanding their limited style of play be cater to here.

TWItch is not wider audience, its just different audience

[Valmy]

pprrff wrote...

Can i just play the devil's advocate and ask why is it so bad for gaming company to try and find wider market appeal for its game? Sure there are hard core fan who love the tactical combat and pause the game every battle to set everything up and micromanage everything. This is perfectly fine.

Man I was just so happy to finally get another game like this, for the first time in years.  It would be pretty sad to see it go the action route again but really at this point I expect it.

[Brian.H]

what incentive would i have to buy mass effect 3 two times?

[Khayness]

Brian.H wrote...

what incentive would i have to buy mass effect 3 two times?

Different exclusive DLC items will do the trick. You will even buy it 5 times if you can get new shiny items isn't mandatory for enjoying the game.

[BroBear Berbil]

I agree with the sentiment that there are already enough action RPGs. I like the tactical combat. I like micro-managing my group. I don't want those things to be changed and to be fair we don't know if they have been.

[L33TDAWG]

It's horrible, DA:O was a perfect rpg. The combat was awesome. I like it better than Mass Effect combat and it seems that's what they are trying to do. I don't like a predetermined destiny thing either. I like creating a character and choosing what happens. It sucks ****ing ass that they scrapped that idea because that's what made DA a great game. They should have allowed you to import your character from DA to DA2... I'll just buy Arcania Gothic 4 and Two Worlds 2 they seem better than DA2 already. Such a BS path to go for a great rpg BWare

[Valmy]

Kalfear wrote...
Yes it is so bad because ME2 didnt successfully get a wider audience, they just replaced part of the audience with a new part and a real arguement can be made that they will have lost more when ME3 comes around then they had gained!

Bioware is a RPOG developer and thats why I buy Bioware games. PERIOD!

I dont go on twitch game develper websites demanding those devs cater to me and take real offence when whiny twitch players come here demanding their limited style of play be cater to here.

TWItch is not wider audience, its just different audience

ME1: not a twitch game?  ME1 was this great RPG with great RPG elements?  ME1 and ME2 where almost exactly the same in my book.  I do not get the hysteria.  The ME series is a shooter/RPG hybrid with a BIoware style party system and dialog.  It is what it is and I do not get the ridiculous claims that somehow ME2 ruined a great RPG.  ME1 was not a great RPG, it was a mediocre shooter with poor excuses for RPG elements and great characters and dialog and plot.

ME2 took the characters to a new level and had a rather meh plot.  But I fail to see the big travesty.  Oooooh a game with a horrible combat system got a slightly different arguably less crappy combat system.  Be still my beating RPG loving heart.  Such a tragedy.

[Querne]

Yes, it is.

[Valmy]

L33TDAWG wrote...

It's horrible, DA:O was a perfect rpg. The combat was awesome. I like it better than Mass Effect combat and it seems that's what they are trying to do. I don't like a predetermined destiny thing either. I like creating a character and choosing what happens. It sucks ****ing ass that they scrapped that idea because that's what made DA a great game. They should have allowed you to import your character from DA to DA2... I'll just buy Arcania Gothic 4 and Two Worlds 2 they seem better than DA2 already. Such a BS path to go for a great rpg BWare

Here is my concern with the importing character thing:

There were so many different outcomes to DA that could they really have done it justice in DA2?  I was pretty disapointed how your decisions did not really seem to influence Awakenings that much.  Maybe it is better they start again.

I do not get the predetermined destiny thing.  Where does this come from?

[Clover Rider]

Valmy wrote...

Kalfear wrote...
Yes it is so bad because ME2 didnt successfully get a wider audience, they just replaced part of the audience with a new part and a real arguement can be made that they will have lost more when ME3 comes around then they had gained!

Bioware is a RPOG developer and thats why I buy Bioware games. PERIOD!

I dont go on twitch game develper websites demanding those devs cater to me and take real offence when whiny twitch players come here demanding their limited style of play be cater to here.

TWItch is not wider audience, its just different audience

ME1: not a twitch game?  ME1 was this great RPG with great RPG elements?  ME1 and ME2 where almost exactly the same in my book.  I do not get the hysteria.  The ME series is a shooter/RPG hybrid with a BIoware style party system and dialog.  It is what it is and I do not get the ridiculous claims that somehow ME2 ruined a great RPG.  ME1 was not a great RPG, it was a mediocre shooter with poor excuses for RPG elements and great characters and dialog and plot.

ME2 took the characters to a new level and had a rather meh plot.  But I fail to see the big travesty.  Oooooh a game with a horrible combat system got a slightly different arguably less crappy combat system.  Be still my beating RPG loving heart.  Such a tragedy.

I like you and this post .

[pprrff]

Images wrote...

pprrff wrote...
 Getting upset of RPG's combat mechanic is to me akin to getting upset over the way your christmas presents are wrapped. Your are mistaking the mechanics of unwrapping presents for the actual presents.

Urrr...I get where you're going with this and tip my hat to you for playing devil's advocate but I've got to say you have to think of a better analogy.

If back when I was a kid I got a gameboy as a gift the wrapping has nothing to do with how it plays. But if when I opened it I found to play the gameboy I had to spin a massive winch on the side of it rather than use my two buttons and up-down cross I'd be slightly peeved. Maybe everyone else would love using the massive winch, Maybe the winch was found to be hugely exciting to but I'm not a winch player and I'd feel disappointed in having to change my play style.
 
You can't blame people for being disappointed. The rage people are giving is a little bit over the top but dissapointment IF the mechanics ARE changed drastically would be quite understandable. We would most likely live and adapt with it but it would be saddening.

I used analogy because I think people loved the old  RPG games, and the old style RPG had this tactical combat system. So people then associate that paticular combat system with good RPG, when the real reason they enjoyed RPG was that the story and the gameplay was really immersive.

[Must have name]

I don't understand the fuss over importing at all. Likewise I don't mind a strictly canon ending to the first game influencing the others.



What I do care about is being constrained to a Human with a pre-set backstory. That's just such a MASSIVE step down.

[Valmy]

Brian.H wrote...

what incentive would i have to buy mass effect 3 two times?

Mass Effect and Dragon Age are totally different gaming styles.  I seriously doubt they are going to turn Dragon Age into a space shooter.

[Brian.H]

the only thing that bothers me is people being pissed about not being able to use their warden.



i can distinctively remember the game telling me this was the end of my story.

http://i155.photobuc...00-00-06-38.jpg



but then again, maybe not everyone killed the demon.



In all seriousness, i have no problem with a new protagonist, as long as the game has a great story, is lengthily (but not boring), has the same inventory system (maybe tweaked so you can chug potions), and the same combat.

[Ulathar]

To answer the question in the thread-title:

(imo)



Yes.

[pprrff]

Valmy wrote...

Kalfear wrote...
Yes it is so bad because ME2 didnt successfully get a wider audience, they just replaced part of the audience with a new part and a real arguement can be made that they will have lost more when ME3 comes around then they had gained!

Bioware is a RPOG developer and thats why I buy Bioware games. PERIOD!

I dont go on twitch game develper websites demanding those devs cater to me and take real offence when whiny twitch players come here demanding their limited style of play be cater to here.

TWItch is not wider audience, its just different audience

ME1: not a twitch game?  ME1 was this great RPG with great RPG elements?  ME1 and ME2 where almost exactly the same in my book.  I do not get the hysteria.  The ME series is a shooter/RPG hybrid with a BIoware style party system and dialog.  It is what it is and I do not get the ridiculous claims that somehow ME2 ruined a great RPG.  ME1 was not a great RPG, it was a mediocre shooter with poor excuses for RPG elements and great characters and dialog and plot.

ME2 took the characters to a new level and had a rather meh plot.  But I fail to see the big travesty.  Oooooh a game with a horrible combat system got a slightly different arguably less crappy combat system.  Be still my beating RPG loving heart.  Such a tragedy.

As much as I liked ME1, the combat (for PC version anyway) was so bad that it pretty ruined the game for me. ME2 may sell us short a bit on 'RPG', the the improve shooting makes it definitively better.

[pprrff]

Systemlord Baal wrote...



Yes.

haha, great, a SG-1 fan.

[Lord_Saulot]

pprrff wrote...

Images wrote...

pprrff wrote...
 Getting upset of RPG's combat mechanic is to me akin to getting upset over the way your christmas presents are wrapped. Your are mistaking the mechanics of unwrapping presents for the actual presents.

Urrr...I get where you're going with this and tip my hat to you for playing devil's advocate but I've got to say you have to think of a better analogy.

If back when I was a kid I got a gameboy as a gift the wrapping has nothing to do with how it plays. But if when I opened it I found to play the gameboy I had to spin a massive winch on the side of it rather than use my two buttons and up-down cross I'd be slightly peeved. Maybe everyone else would love using the massive winch, Maybe the winch was found to be hugely exciting to but I'm not a winch player and I'd feel disappointed in having to change my play style.
 
You can't blame people for being disappointed. The rage people are giving is a little bit over the top but dissapointment IF the mechanics ARE changed drastically would be quite understandable. We would most likely live and adapt with it but it would be saddening.

I used analogy because I think people loved the old  RPG games, and the old style RPG had this tactical combat system. So people then associate that paticular combat system with good RPG, when the real reason they enjoyed RPG was that the story and the gameplay was really immersive.

People like things for different reasons.  Some people do enjoy the game because of the tactical combat system, or because of the way it interacts with other things.  That is especially true when those elements help to define the style of the game.  Other people are not wrong for liking different things than you.  Mechanics are a major part of game design, and ultimately, these are still games, not books or movies. 

In any case, there is no evidence yet that they are even considering getting rid of RPG tactical combat.

[sanadawarrior]

Kalfear wrote...

pprrff wrote...

Can i just play the devil's advocate and ask why is it so bad for gaming company to try and find wider market appeal for its game? Sure there are hard core fan who love the tactical combat and pause the game every battle to set everything up and micromanage everything. This is perfectly fine.

But I think those things are mechanics, not the soul of RPG. They are a legacy when RPG combat is limited by technology. The soul of RPG is that people can escape into fantasy for couple hours a day and pretend to be someone else. Getting upset of RPG's combat mechanic is to me akin to getting upset over the way your christmas presents are wrapped. Your are mistaking the mechanics of unwrapping presents for the actual presents.

Now before I get insulted I would just like to say that I don't have problems with all the classic RPG traits that DAO had. It didn't bother me at all that you need to pause the game to set everything up properly.

Yes it is so bad because ME2 didnt successfully get a wider audience, they just replaced part of the audience with a new part and a real arguement can be made that they will have lost more when ME3 comes around then they had gained!

Bioware is a RPOG developer and thats why I buy Bioware games. PERIOD!

I dont go on twitch game develper websites demanding those devs cater to me and take real offence when whiny twitch players come here demanding their limited style of play be cater to here.

TWItch is not wider audience, its just different audience

ME 2 is selling comparably to the first game even though it released in January instead of before the holidays so having comparisons about total sales are rather moot when ME has had 3 holiday seasons to ME 2 having 0.

I buy Bioware games because they are awesome, not because I have some sort of preconception about what kind of games they are allowed to make and not make.

Regardless, saying twitch is not a wider audience is luaghable. Halo 3 sold 11 million copies. Modern Warfare 2 20+ million copies. What kind of rpg has sold like that?

[Phazor58]

pprrff wrote...

Can i just play the devil's advocate and ask why is it so bad for gaming company to try and find wider market appeal for its game? Sure there are hard core fan who love the tactical combat and pause the game every battle to set everything up and micromanage everything. This is perfectly fine.

But I think those things are mechanics, not the soul of RPG. They are a legacy when RPG combat is limited by technology. The soul of RPG is that people can escape into fantasy for couple hours a day and pretend to be someone else. Getting upset of RPG's combat mechanic is to me akin to getting upset over the way your christmas presents are wrapped. Your are mistaking the mechanics of unwrapping presents for the actual presents.

Now before I get insulted I would just like to say that I don't have problems with all the classic RPG traits that DAO had. It didn't bother me at all that you need to pause the game to set everything up properly.

Of course the game mechanics used in DA:O aren't the "soul of RPG."  But they were a major part of DA:O.  If they completely change the system that worked in DA:O (and appealed to a wide audience already as seen by sales numbers), then it's not Dragon Age anymore.  It's still an RPG, but it's not Dragon Age.  And that's the whole problem.

[Korva]

it is bad for those of us who love the old-school complex combat. The twitch crowd is already amply catered to. But there is, to my knowledge (and I admit I stopped following the development of the industry a good while ago because there were fewer and fewer interesting games announced each year), NO ONE who makes this kind of game anymore.

Everything is about better graphics, more voice acting, more impressive cinematics, more action, bigger explosions. Style over substance. Glamor over depth. More and more diversity is lost as genres disappear, studios fold or are absorbed by big corporations, and the mainstream $$$ becomes the end-all and be-all.

There is more money in the industry now than ever before, I guess. But for those of us who grew up with oldies-but-goldies that likely wouldn't stand a snowflake's chance in hell to be made these days because they would not be flashy, impressive and fast-paced enough, it can be sad. I don't know how long I'll be a gamer anymore. Or I guess I'll always be and just go back to the old games, but no longer buy new ones. *shrug*

Modifié par Korva, 09 juillet 2010 - 05:07 .

[hawat333]

No.



But it seems it will be dropping the shape-as-you-feel-fit character development to a pre-dermined one who can be guided but not developed as you like.

So for that:

Yes.



And why? Because it changes what Dragon Age is. Dragon Age was even more successful than Mass Effect 1 or 2, so I don't see why they should take the same development path with something so basic as the vantage point of the narrative.

[Anathemic]

Valmy wrote...

Brian.H wrote...

what incentive would i have to buy mass effect 3 two times?

Mass Effect and Dragon Age are totally different gaming styles.  I seriously doubt they are going to turn Dragon Age into a space shooter.

Well it seems DA is going the ME path with a predetermined chracter and speculation of VO.
DA:O was a good game because it was different from other RPG's out there and had it's own feel, the Origin stories (some I admit failed in comparison to others), character customization, different builds, and of course the story, made DA:O well liked and loved.
But now DA2 is starting to feel like Mass Effect and/or Mass Effect 2, why? It's already set in fact that we havea predetermined chracter, who is human, just like the predetermiend character in Mass Effect, Shepard.
Not only that but the main plot is starting to sound like ME2:


"Experience the epic sequel to the 2009 Game of the Year from the
critically acclaimed makers of Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect 2.
You are one of the few who escaped the destruction of your home. Now,
forced to fight for survival in an ever-changing world, you must gather
the deadliest of allies, amass fame and fortune, and seal your place in
history. This is the story of how the world changed forever. The legend
of your Rise to Power begins now."

What did we do in ME2? We went all over the galaxy recruiting the "deadliest of allies", we "amassed fame and fortune" by just being Commander shepard who returned to life, and we "sealed our place in history" by taking the fight to the Collectors and ruining their plans in constucting a hybrid Reaper, not to mention saved many human colonies in the process.

Modifié par Anathemic, 09 juillet 2010 - 05:06 .