1230 réponses à ce sujet

[Arttis]

Bumping because of spammer...

[Kilshrek]

Right, I'll just hope that this gets read.. Purely speculation, and merely what I hope to offer as an observation.



Way back(well, kinda) when Relic came up with Company of Heroes and Dawn of War, surely there were screams of rage along the lines of "Where are my resource harvesters?! Where are my cheap rush units? OMGWTF Cover?!" but didn't the games move on to become such things as 'a breath of fresh air for the genre' etc etc? Admittedly the RPG market is hardly what you could call saturated but certainly the market is stagnating. A sad but true rule here is that money talks. I'm not saying that Bioware is only out for our money, but they gotta keep the company going. And that brings me to this, a new direction.



As with CoH and DoW, games that broke the 'rules' of RTS gaming, I can only imagine that DA 2 will be Bioware's attempt to 'break the rules' of RPG gaming. The game will not be so radically different as to be unrecognizable from other games, but certainly different enough to stand apart from the others. I had a friend who complained to me about DAO for the 360, and while I'm not trying to sound elitist or anything, he was more of a twitch gamer. I recommended Mass Effect to him, and he found out about DAO from the trailers. Manson's New **** song anyone? He told me he expected God of War, not oodles of dialogue and pause/select gameplay. Not his game, yes, but also not what he expected after watching the trailers.



Perhaps the console gameplay will be adapted to offer a happy medium of console style action and story/dialogue. We can only speculate and/or froth at the mouth until we get more solid information from the devs, which they will release when they are good and ready.



Personally I hope to not encounter any spoilers until I get my hands on the game. Knowing things beforehand rather diminishes the excitement, but at the same time I just can't keep away...



But coming back to the point I was trying to make, perhaps this is Bioware's crack at breathing new life into the genre. I may be talking out of my ass, but then again, I'm not the one making the game.

[Terror_K]

I wouldn't have a problem with BioWare wanting to try new things with the RPG and trying out new hybrids and the like if they just did it with something original, via either a new IP or with a spin-off game. What I'm not liking is messing with sequels which should be continuing the tone and feel of the original game rather than changing things up too much.

Mass Effect 2 changed far too much and was far too removed from the original game and it ruined the whole experience because of it. I don't want to see the same thing happen with Dragon Age too. I understand that there's an audience out there that's not just a bunch of sweaty nerds wearing pointy ears that are Vulcan ears at one convention and elf ears at another, but if you're going to chase the mainstream gamer of today why do the games made for those of us who want a bit more depth have to be dragged through the mud and watered-down to do it?

Modifié par Terror_K, 20 juillet 2010 - 12:58 .

[Clovis-]

Terror_K wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

*snipped*

Seriously, though, I know folks are afraid of change, but regardless of how you think it looks, how about seeing how it plays--you know, because it's a game from a company you say you are/wer a fan of--before walking off in a huff and taking your ball with you?

Sorry Stanley... I'm still feeling the burn too much from Mass Effect 2 to have a lot of faith in you guys at the moment, and the parallels between that and DA2 are just too similar for my tastes.

I'm not giving up entirely, but forgive me if I'm extremely sceptical here. Besides... if you're right and I'm wrong, then I'll be pleasantly surprised, won't I?

What crazy world do I live in where people think ME2 was a step down in game design!? God they made that game so good... so deliciously good I just wanna make love to... well, this isnt about Mass Effect


I don't understand why "streamlined" is such a bad thing; in engineering, it generally comes down to a more efficient product. Sure Dragon Age had better character interaction and other features that were unique compared to Mass Effect, but a more streamlined approached to the first game doesnt mean negativity, it means refiinned.

I mean, try to think objectively, as impossible as that may be for a person; was Mass Effect REALLY a better product than Mass Effect 2?

[Terror_K]

Clovis- wrote...

What crazy world do I live in where people think ME2 was a step down in game design!? God they made that game so good... so deliciously good I just wanna make love to... well, this isnt about Mass Effect

ME2 was generic and shallow gameplay wise. 'Nuff said.

I don't understand why "streamlined" is such a bad thing; in engineering, it generally comes down to a more efficient product. Sure Dragon Age had better character interaction and other features that were unique compared to Mass Effect, but a more streamlined approached to the first game doesnt mean negativity, it means refiinned.

That's all very well, but "steamlining" isn't what BioWare did with ME2: they dumbed it down. Streamlining is when you make an existing aspect as user-friendly and efficient as possible while still retaining its full functionality. The ME2 team just threw out the old elements and replaced them with different ones that didn't do everything the original elements did and were so overly simple they couldn't really fail, which is why they're not as "flawed" (i.e. there aren't as many moving parts that can go wrong). So what we ended up with were systems that technically worked better, but were shallow, linear and didn't do as much as the original ones.

I mean, try to think objectively, as impossible as that may be for a person; was Mass Effect REALLY a better product than Mass Effect 2?

Whether it's a better product is a matter of opinion. ME1 was a better RPG than ME2 was though. One can argue whether the changes were an improvement or not, but the issue as to whether RPG elements were slimmed down and removed is pretty much solid fact.

[Foreman20]

Terror-K also expresses exactly the way I feel about what I have heard so far concerning DA/2.

[Clovis-]

Terror_K wrote...

ME2 was generic and shallow gameplay wise. 'Nuff said.

no no nooo, not enough said! haha, lets break it down

I'm reeally curious now; "GAMEPLAY", what gameplay mechanics were better in ME over ME2? Was it the shooter mechanics? The skill use mechanics? The traversing mechanics? The UI mechanics? the The driving mechanics? The mini-game mechanics? The exploration mechanics? Please elaborate what about these mechanics makes them more shallow in ME2

That's all very well, but "steamlining" isn't what BioWare did with ME2: they dumbed it down. Streamlining is when you make an existing aspect as user-friendly and efficient as possible while still retaining its full functionality. The ME2 team just threw out the old elements and replaced them with different ones that didn't do everything the original elements did and were so overly simple they couldn't really fail, which is why they're not as "flawed" (i.e. there aren't as many moving parts that can go wrong). So what we ended up with were systems that technically worked better, but were shallow, linear and didn't do as much as the original ones.

I can see what you're saying for isolated mechanics in the game being removed or limited, but if the function of a product is improved by removing archaic functionality, then wouldnt it be a benefit to do so? Like certain car parts being obsolete with more streamlined designs even though many old car parts are more durable or have specific functionalities that new models do not. I can see their appeal as being vintage, but from a design aspect, they do not complement the product as a whole.

But enough of vague analogies, I would be interested in what specific examples you have qualms with being as I'm baffled by your opinion. 

Whether it's a better product is a matter of opinion. ME1 was a better RPG than ME2 was though. One can argue whether the changes were an improvement or not, but the issue as to whether RPG elements were slimmed down and removed is pretty much solid fact.

Aahh, this we're going to have to agree to disagree; I don't really care about what makes a better "RPG" or not, as I have no interest in what makes an RPG. I measure games by the the quality of their experience, not by their ability to fulfill predetermined characteristics of mine.

If it helps you understand where I'm coming from, my top five games of all time go as follows

ME2
KOTOR (star wars faannnn)
The Witcher
Dragon Age
Batman AA (I really love batman)

Modifié par Clovis-, 20 juillet 2010 - 01:40 .

[the_one_54321]

Clovis- wrote...
 but a more streamlined approached to the first game doesnt mean negativity

Yes it does. This is game design, not engineering.

Clovis- wrote...
I mean, try to think objectively, as impossible as that may be for a person; was Mass Effect REALLY a better product than Mass Effect 2?

Oh, I am thinking objectively. I'm very far from screaming the denouncement of DA][. However, ME was in itself something technical blunder where gameplay was concerned, and ME2 didn't do much to fix it. Strictly speaking neither of them are RPGs outside of the modernist, we'll-call-it-whatever-we-want-because-we-change-with-public-perception view of game developers.
Games are defined by their mechanics and the ME franchise tried to take two mechanics that don't mix and then mix them. The result was held together by its amazing story. But RPG fans and Shooter fans both panned the mechanics. ME2 sided with the shooters while keeping only just enough on the RPG side to maintain some credibility. Again, an amazing story kept the whole thing very successful.
But if you want depth in the gameplay, which is something that DA:O really had, then you need to look at games like RTSs and consider the combat that takes place there, because RPGs have far more in common with those games than they ever did with Action games or Shooters. Pull a few individual units out of an RTS system and develop them more deeply and then let the player control only those instead of having the player build and manage an army. That is true, deep and entertaining RPG gameplay. And it is decidedly not ME or ME2.
Now the big thing here is that most people are not saying that ME or ME2 were bad games. Again, the amazing story has kept them both exciting and successful. But we don't want to see more of the ME franchise outside of the ME franchise.

Different is good.
Diversity benefits everyone.
Keep ME like ME.
Keep DA like DA.

[Orchomene]

One can speculate a lot on the reasons behind modifications and it may end in a mix of :

• having the feeling that the changes are for the best
• marketing constraints linked to the development cost
• feeling that the audience (gamers and reviewers) are expecting those changes
• constraints linked to storytelling, that is the game would be awful to design without the changes done.
• other environment constraints (engine wise, time wise) or internal constraints (human and company).

So far, BW takes generally a lot into account the feedbacks given by the audience. A bit too much to my taste for an artistic creation point of view (but this is another debate). I don't remeber what were the most important drawbacks of DAO, maybe the bugs. Thus, the changes may be also linked to having a more technically stable game.

Personnaly, I can't judge with so few information. I doubt the changes will correspond to my taste since I don't have the feeling I have the taste of the majority of todays gamers (I don't like shooters, action games, cool graphics and cinematics are not what I'm looking for in video games) and the audience of BW. I used to, up to BG2 and Kotor (a bit less, already). DAO was fun and a bit more to my taste but I don't find much interest in ME1/2 or JE. Thus, I would appreciate a DA2 that is closer to ten-year-old RPGs and can't expect it to happen. So, I will wait and see.

[CarlSpackler]

Orchomene wrote...


[*]Personnaly, I can't judge with so few information. I doubt the changes will correspond to my taste since I don't have the feeling I have the taste of the majority of todays gamers (I don't like shooters, action games, cool graphics and cinematics are not what I'm looking for in video games) and the audience of BW. I used to, up to BG2 and Kotor (a bit less, already). DAO was fun and a bit more to my taste but I don't find much interest in ME1/2 or JE. Thus, I would appreciate a DA2 that is closer to ten-year-old RPGs and can't expect it to happen. So, I will wait and see.

Yeah, I've tried to keep my questions and criticisms limited to what has been revealed, and as I went back and forth with David a little bit earlier in the thread, the dialog wheel and voice acting are not completely unknown quantities.  Voice acting in particular is a known quantity, the voice actor they choose will ring true for some folks and not for others.  Now there has been some information indicating the dialog wheel has been refined.  I certainly hope so, if thats the route they're going to take I really hope it does work better for me than it did in the ME games.  And other than the lack of choice in race, we really don't know much else about what has been changed from DAO in gameplay.  Now there have been a few encouraging morsels to come out over the past week or so such as assurance that the PC version will retain its combat system.  One of the Bioware guys - I think it was Mike Laidlaw- said that they didn't want to make a sequel where the fans of the first game found it unrecognizeable from its predecessor.  There was also the comment -I think Laidlaw again- who found DA2's character progression to be more complex than DAO.  So right now its really just a waiting game I suppose to see if they follow through on these claims.  Right now all we've been fed are the changes, and while I'm as disapointed as the next guy (well depending on who the next guy is, some folks go way over-board) I'll take the wait and see approach, but right now still plan on purchasing the game, it aint like I've got a lot of choice in games when it comes to story-driven, character-centric games.

On a side note regarding the ME games.  Its kind of funny, but if EPIC, Bungie, or Rockstar had crafted the ME games I would have been ecstatic seeing the shooter industry producing a shooter that I truly enjoyed as a solo game.  Comming from Bioware though there was a degree of disapointment in expectations not being met (for a variety of reasons.)  Looking at it through that lens though, I am glad Bioware tried their hand at a 3rd person shooter/rpg hybrid game and made it work.  For me the games were fun, just not BG2/KOTOR/DAO fun.  And at least for me thats where some of my concern/paranoia for DA2 comes from.  I want DA2 to remain closer to the more traditional approach to RPGs. 

[AlanC9]

Clovis- wrote...

What crazy world do I live in where people think ME2 was a step down in game design!? God they made that game so good... so deliciously good I just wanna make love to... well, this isnt about Mass Effect

Drop by the "Disappointed with ME2" thread for a recap of the argument. We really don't need to rehash that here. Yeah, some people really didn't like the ME2 changes. And then there's a somewhat more esoteric argument where the changes made ME2 a better game but a worse RPG.

Modifié par AlanC9, 20 juillet 2010 - 03:00 .

[AlanC9]

the_one_54321 wrote...
But if you want depth in the gameplay, which is something that DA:O really had, then you need to look at games like RTSs and consider the combat that takes place there, because RPGs have far more in common with those games than they ever did with Action games or Shooters. Pull a few individual units out of an RTS system and develop them more deeply and then let the player control only those instead of having the player build and manage an army. That is true, deep and entertaining RPG gameplay. And it is decidedly not ME or ME2.

I'm not sure it's DAO either. 

[CarlSpackler]

AlanC9 wrote...

Clovis- wrote...

What crazy world do I live in where people think ME2 was a step down in game design!? God they made that game so good... so deliciously good I just wanna make love to... well, this isnt about Mass Effect

Drop by the "Disappointed with ME2" thread for a recap of the argument. We really don't need to rehash that here. Yeah, some people really didn't like the ME2 changes. And then there's a somewhat more esoteric argument where the changes made ME2 a better game but a worse RPG.

As someone who probably liked ME2 about equally well as ME1, I honestly think ME2 was a more refined game.  The game itself did seem of higher quality and polish, but there were certainly some aspects of ME1 that I missed in ME2 or additions to ME2 that I did not care for.  For example ME1 for me felt less claustrophobic, something about the level-design and even the much maligned UNC and mako missions made the universe seem larger.  Addtionally small touches in ME2 bugged me such as the "Mission Complete" screen, I loathed that feature, would have loved to be able to disable it.  I also missed that when entering/exiting the Normandy that it stayed docked until you left the planet.  In ME2 when returning to the Normandy you automatically headed back to orbit.  These may be small things but they certainly changed the atmosphere for me anyways.  Conversely there was a lot I liked about ME2 and really appreciated how Bioware handled the choices carried over.  There seems to be a lot of outrage over this but I'm not sure what people were expecting.  Writing and implementing for all the possible changes is a logistical and developmental nightmare, I liked the route they took.  But I appear to be in the minority on this point.

Back to DA2 (before I get yelled at for going OT) this is kind of what I expect for DA2, changes I like, changes I don't like.  C'est la vie.

[LadyLuminary]

Akizora wrote...

The world is changing, I feel it in the earth, I feel it in the water, I smell it in the air. Much that once was is now
forgotten; for none now live who remember it.

It began with the making of the great games: Three of Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights were given to the oldschool RPG-fans, the most dedicated and loyal of all beings. Two of Knights of the Old Republic and Jade Empire were given to the new generation of RPG fans, great gamers and players of the new era. And Two were passed to the race of men, who  above all else desire power and were thus given Mass Effect.

The oldschool RPG-fans rejoiced upon the release of Dragon Age: Origins and as did all the other races.

...But they were all of them decieved for another game was made: in the halls of Bioware, in the fires of Internet Hate, the dark lord Gaider forged, in secret, a master game to control all others. And into this game he poured his cruelty, his malice, and his will to dominate all life....This game was Dragon Age 2

This post wins everything.

[soteria]

^^ That's rich.

[Riona45]

Clovis- wrote...
I don't understand why "streamlined" is such a bad thing; in engineering, it generally comes down to a more efficient product. Sure Dragon Age had better character interaction and other features that were unique compared to Mass Effect, but a more streamlined approached to the first game doesnt mean negativity, it means refiinned.

If I had to guess, I'd say that a lot of people like to imagine they are "better" than others if they "get" something complicated, hence why streamlining is pejoratively referred to as "dumbing down."

[FlyinElk212]

The number of threads that needed to be locked due to them all having this thread's same subject is a bad sign, devs. Is more information coming that could possibly swell the tide? According to the "clear in the double digits" amount of locks, a lot of people are already giving up on the game. I'd release new info sooner rather than later.

Modifié par FlyinElk212, 20 juillet 2010 - 09:13 .

[Mecha Tengu]

even Devs have social lives outside their jobs of monitoring this thread. Please TLDR your stuff



I would prefer:

well developped story, (recruiting new team members and dealing with their issues is not a good plot)

real time twitch action combat

do not remove, simplify, or condense any of the RPG elements, and if possible expand more on them (inventory, class customization)

better graphics and animations

[Jimmy Fury]

Mecha Tengu wrote...

well developped story, (recruiting new team members and dealing with their issues is not a good plot)

To you maybe.

Character development is an integral part to any story. If we get to recruit people I want to know about them. If they've got problems I want to be able to help with them.

[In Exile]

The problem with that story mechanic is that, well, it is useless. It actually captures the problem with ME2 from a story standpoint. The recruiting missions are strong; some of the companion missions are particularly poignant (personally I think Tali's is done best). The problem is that all these missions leavfe the plot dangling. The reapers are in the exact same position at the end of ME2 as at the end of ME1; the galaxy is in the same state. Absolutely nothing changes.

[Stanley Woo]

Terror_K wrote...
Sorry Stanley... I'm still feeling the burn too much from Mass Effect 2 to have a lot of faith in you guys at the moment, and the parallels between that and DA2 are just too similar for my tastes.

I'm not giving up entirely, but forgive me if I'm extremely sceptical here. Besides... if you're right and I'm wrong, then I'll be pleasantly surprised, won't I?

Oh hey, "extremely skeptical," I can work with. i thought you'd just given up entirely and wanted to keep reminding us how youv've given up, even though we wouldn't concern ourselves with people who had given up anyway. lol

Really, though, there's nothing happenign between BioWare and the fans that says the fans must like everything we do, nor is there anything that says BioWare must make games a certain way. We certainly hope people will always like waht we do, but everything's going to have a bell curve. A whole bunch of people will be okay with it, the extreme positive side will be fanatical regardless of what we do, the extreme negative side will be inconsolable regardless of what we do, and we'll see the same pattern repeat itself when we announce other projects in the future.

As David said, this kind of reaction by the fans is neither new nor unexpected.

[Stanley Woo]

FlyinElk212 wrote...

The number of threads that needed to be locked due to them all having this thread's same subject is a bad sign, devs.

It's a bad sign that people think they're personal opinions are more important than everyone else's. it's a bad sign that people are no longer even making a token effort to scan the existing threads in the first few pages before posting their own. it's a bad sign that forumites believe we don't know what we're doing, and that one lone voice of reason is going to make us change our minds and change the game entirely.

Is more information coming that could possibly swell the tide?

I guess you'll just have to stick around to find out.

According to the "clear in the double digits" amount of locks, a lot of people are already giving up on the game. I'd release new info sooner rather than later.

so people can jump to even more conclusions sooner rather than later? People will come and go as they please. We're going to keep going and hopefully our forumites will find future information releases more to their liking. But I'm not going to promise anything.

[2papercuts]

In Exile wrote...

The problem with that story mechanic is that, well, it is useless. It actually captures the problem with ME2 from a story standpoint. The recruiting missions are strong; some of the companion missions are particularly poignant (personally I think Tali's is done best). The problem is that all these missions leavfe the plot dangling. The reapers are in the exact same position at the end of ME2 as at the end of ME1; the galaxy is in the same state. Absolutely nothing changes.

but you got to see a lot of explosions

[Jimmy Fury]

In Exile wrote...

The problem with that story mechanic is that, well, it is useless. It actually captures the problem with ME2 from a story standpoint. The recruiting missions are strong; some of the companion missions are particularly poignant (personally I think Tali's is done best). The problem is that all these missions leavfe the plot dangling. The reapers are in the exact same position at the end of ME2 as at the end of ME1; the galaxy is in the same state. Absolutely nothing changes.

That is very true. It does, of course, need to be done well. The loyalty missions in ME2 were, mostly, lightyears better than the companion quests in Origins. I found most of them more compelling than the main plot. Unfortunately that  combined with ME2 being afflicted with middle-of-a-trilogy-syndrome (it feels less like it's own story and more like a bridge between the begining and the end) did make the overall plot a bit lackluster.

I still found it enjoyable, just lackluster.

Since I haven't heard anyone say DA is slated to be a trilogy, I think some deeper companion quests could fit well so long as they're connected to the main plot in some fashion.

[Khavos]

Mecha Tengu wrote...

I would prefer:
real time twitch action combat
do not remove, simplify, or condense any of the RPG elements, and if possible expand more on them (inventory, class customization)

You know those two are mutually exclusive, right?