302 réponses à ce sujet

[Deathstyk85]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Deathstyk85 wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Deathstyk85 wrote...

dbankier wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

I remember when BG was getting ported to the Dreamcast. Wish that game would have come out just to see what it would look like.

Not quite, Playstation, actually. I can't imagine controlling the cursor with a controller would have been very efficient, you'd probably have to spend most of the game paused.

no, it WAS made for playstation, and it was terrible, horrible, awful, excuse for a game. in my opinion atleast.

LOL did the rom get released?

the ps2 version they made,made me terribly sad. yes it did, it was called baldurs gate broken alliance. and it made me want to hurl. my understanding was that the dreamcast version was supposed to be actually similar to baldurs gate, where as this was a solo player, choose from one of three characters, and then run around mashing one button murdering millions of kobolds, skeletons etc, with no real story at all.

No, actually the youtube video he showed was BG on the playstation the original.

I have dark alliance and it has surprisingly good graphics for tis time.  Pretty much a diablo clone.

ah i see. i couldnt tell the different in the "link" because im on a ****ty computer at the moment. like literally all text looks the same lol

[Haexpane]

Deathstyk85 wrote...
 

the ps2 version they made,made me terribly sad. yes it did, it was called baldurs gate broken alliance.

Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance
actually

That was NOT a port of BG.  It was NOT made by bioware.

It is an award winning SNOWBLIND action RPG w/ the BG license designed to be a PS2 style diablo.  It was a fantastic game but has nothing at all to do w/ BG BG2, DAO or Bioware and has nothing to do w/ this thread

[Haexpane]

Deathstyk85 wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Deathstyk85 wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Deathstyk85 wrote...

dbankier wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

I remember when BG was getting ported to the Dreamcast. Wish that game would have come out just to see what it would look like.

Not quite, Playstation, actually. I can't imagine controlling the cursor with a controller would have been very efficient, you'd probably have to spend most of the game paused.

no, it WAS made for playstation, and it was terrible, horrible, awful, excuse for a game. in my opinion atleast.

LOL did the rom get released?

the ps2 version they made,made me terribly sad. yes it did, it was called baldurs gate broken alliance. and it made me want to hurl. my understanding was that the dreamcast version was supposed to be actually similar to baldurs gate, where as this was a solo player, choose from one of three characters, and then run around mashing one button murdering millions of kobolds, skeletons etc, with no real story at all.

No, actually the youtube video he showed was BG on the playstation the original.

I have dark alliance and it has surprisingly good graphics for tis time.  Pretty much a diablo clone.

ah i see. i couldnt tell the different in the "link" because im on a ****ty computer at the moment. like literally all text looks the same lol

Ahh we are talking about unreleased ROMs?   why?   The original Playstation 1 could not even handle 680 graphics, of course a BG port wold be awful

[DPB]

Deathstyk85 wrote...

umm yes, i have it upstaires in my dresser full of ****ty old games.

You're confusing Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance with Baldur's Gate. BGDA wasn't made by Bioware, and it wasn't intended to be a port, it was an entirely different game, just cashing in on the success of BG.

[Deathstyk85]

dbankier wrote...

Deathstyk85 wrote...

umm yes, i have it upstaires in my dresser full of ****ty old games.

You're confusing Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance with Baldur's Gate. BGDA wasn't made by Bioware, and it wasn't intended to be a port, it was an entirely different game, just cashing in on the success of BG.

well they were talking about bg on the consoles, and i didnt see his link. and since that was the only bg titled game released on console, thats what i assumed he was talking about.

[DeepGray]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

You can now, but not originally. Not before Valve scooped them up

Same with Day of Defeat, I got it before it was a retail release.

It's still free with the original game. And yes, sometimes you CAN judge a game based on the mods that it spawned. Half Life 1/2 (and GoldSRC/Source) won much accolades for its ease and level of mod support. Regarding the shifting meaning of 'mod' and 'DLC', there is some disputes since marketing pretty much calls all new content DLC whether it's free or not. So for now, mods are user-created while official content is DLC although the two could be of the same polish and quality. Is CS:S a mod or DLC? What is a patch then?

Finally, box? Lol, get with the times.

[Chuvvy]

DeepGray wrote...

Larryboy_Dragon wrote...


Great input. Very eloquent.

‘lol’ all you’d like, at the time Morrowind was typical of a RPGs developed solely for PC and it was later ported to console without losing any depth.

So how did you like the nearly endless mods on your xbox? Oh wait.

Yeah, console gamers miss out on a **** load of bad retextures nude mods sexualized ogres and realistic erect dog penis mods. CONSOLE PEASANTS WE ARE GLORIOUS PC MASTER RACE.

*Note I have a gaming PC and Consoles and watching you guys bicker is hysterical.

[DeepGray]

Haexpane wrote...

I never said "Farmvile hardcore PC gamers"  read the quote, I said PC owns the casual game space.

Yet you lumped CS with Farmvile. The only thing they have in common is that you use a mouse. You know you can probably play Farmville on a console right?

Slidell505 wrote...

DeepGray wrote...

Larryboy_Dragon wrote...


Great input. Very eloquent.

‘lol’ all you’d like, at the time Morrowind was typical of a RPGs developed solely for PC and it was later ported to console without losing any depth.

So how did you like the nearly endless mods on your xbox? Oh wait. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/w00t.png[/smilie]

Yeah,
console gamers miss out on a **** load of bad retextures nude mods
sexualized ogres and realistic erect dog penis mods.
CONSOLE PEASANTS WE ARE GLORIOUS PC MASTER RACE.

*Note I have a gaming PC and Consoles and watching you guys bicker is hysterical.

Yeah,
I know it's funny especially when I can play both sides too. But thanks
for dragging yourself into the argument. I knew some people couldn't
resist.

Modifié par DeepGray, 13 juillet 2010 - 10:05 .

[DeepGray]

Modifié par DeepGray, 13 juillet 2010 - 10:04 .

[FeanortheBrave]

I am a PC gamer and console gamer...omg omg WHAT SIDE DO I CHOOSE!?

[DeepGray]

FeanortheBrave wrote...

I am a PC gamer and console gamer...omg omg WHAT SIDE DO I CHOOSE!?

Whichever side is winning of course.















Hint: PC!

[Icinix]

I'm a gamer.



Console / PC / Handheld. It's all just a a different name for a tool for me to waste more of my life on computer games.



MOAR!!!!!!

[Larryboy_Dragon]

Haexpane wrote...

Jade Empire - love the game.  But combat is completely broken and there is no "party" you get 1 helper, who is 90% more effective in meditation instead of combat.

Jade Empire - press block to win

Exactly… and I’m just hoping DA2 doesn’t go that way.

Haexpane wrote...


The "golden age" of console gaming was

Chrono Trigger
Earthbound
etc..

the opposite of "action, dumbed down, casual"

I would prefer any Ultima game to Chrono Trigger.

DeepGray wrote...

Larryboy_Dragon wrote...


Great input. Very eloquent.

‘lol’ all you’d like, at the time Morrowind was typical of a RPGs developed solely for PC and it was later ported to console without losing any depth.

So how did you like the nearly endless mods on your xbox? Oh wait.

Totally. Player made mods are missing on the Xbox because the devalopers had to cut back...
Oh, wait. No. Mods aren't there because the Xbox is a closed system. They weren't cut out, scaled back or removed.

Again, I’m not worried about necessary changes, only unnecessary changes that would appeal to more casual gamers.

bjdbwea wrote...

Games like DA belong on PCs. You can't control them properly with console controllers.

KotOR and Dragon Age controlled fine (although DA could have used proper pause and queuing orders).
So why, exactly do games like DA belong on PC?

Oh, because YOU have a PC.

Modifié par Larryboy_Dragon, 13 juillet 2010 - 10:19 .

[Gaddmeister]

Larryboy_Dragon wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

Games like DA belong on PCs. You can't control them properly with console controllers.

KotOR and Dragon Age controlled fine (although DA could have used proper pause and queuing orders).
So why, exactly do games like DA belong on PC?

Oh, because YOU have a PC.

I have to disagree. For example, selecting a target was tedious if there were many enemies on screen at the same time as you had to scroll through a whole bunch of targets until you found the one you were looking for. Or perhaps you wanted to move your archer to higher ground? Then you had to select him/her and actively run away to the new position without the ability to see or control what happened to your other party members during that time. Let's face it, the console controls were not as good as their pc counterparts.

[Onyx Jaguar]

DeepGray wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

You can now, but not originally. Not before Valve scooped them up

Same with Day of Defeat, I got it before it was a retail release.

It's still free with the original game. And yes, sometimes you CAN judge a game based on the mods that it spawned. Half Life 1/2 (and GoldSRC/Source) won much accolades for its ease and level of mod support. Regarding the shifting meaning of 'mod' and 'DLC', there is some disputes since marketing pretty much calls all new content DLC whether it's free or not. So for now, mods are user-created while official content is DLC although the two could be of the same polish and quality. Is CS:S a mod or DLC? What is a patch then?

Finally, box? Lol, get with the times.

CS:S is its own product. I am talking about the original Counter Strike which was a mod then made into a retail game.  Just like its clone on the UT engine, just like Day of Defeat, just like Team Fortress classic.

CS:S was made by Valve team

Counter Strike was made by independent modders

Half-Life is good with or without these mods.

[Grommash94]

Gaddmeister wrote...

Larryboy_Dragon wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

Games like DA belong on PCs. You can't control them properly with console controllers.

KotOR and Dragon Age controlled fine (although DA could have used proper pause and queuing orders).
So why, exactly do games like DA belong on PC?

Oh, because YOU have a PC.

I have to disagree. For example, selecting a target was tedious if there were many enemies on screen at the same time as you had to scroll through a whole bunch of targets until you found the one you were looking for. Or perhaps you wanted to move your archer to higher ground? Then you had to select him/her and actively run away to the new position without the ability to see or control what happened to your other party members during that time. Let's face it, the console controls were not as good as their pc counterparts.

They were not as good....but I felt it was just a bit tougher really, you get used to it really, really fast.

[bjdbwea]

Larryboy_Dragon wrote...

KotOR and Dragon Age controlled fine (although DA could have used proper pause and queuing orders).
So why, exactly do games like DA belong on PC?

Oh, because YOU have a PC.

That's certainly not the reason, even though you could easily purchase a PC able to run DA too, if you didn't spend the money on a console + the additional 20 bucks you pay for every game + the other stuff they make you pay for because you have no choice but to get it from them.

The reason such games belong on PCs is, as I said, because mouse and keyboard are the only input method that works properly. That's actually true for many games. Just because it can be made to work on consoles - somehow - doesn't make it less true. KotoR is a good example. As great as it was, the PC version could've been much better if it didn't have the compromised console interface.

So that DA 2 apparently will have a different system for PC and consoles is the first thing I read about it that I like. Hopefully it'll turn out true and well done.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 13 juillet 2010 - 10:41 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

I never felt like I was handicapped while playing it on the 360

[Rubbish Hero]

According to Eurogamer, who never lie, the pc is vastly superior and the console game only exists for cheap profit.

www.eurogamer.net/articles/dragon-age-origins-xbox360-review

It's ok to flick wheels.

Modifié par Rubbish Hero, 13 juillet 2010 - 11:14 .

[Eshme]

Hasnt it been for Dragon Age, that the console difficulty was lower, alone friendly fire and amount of enemies.



I think it is a great idea to differentiate controls. Because a ported control scheme has proven to be a destroyer for good games. See Mass Effect for PC that is a desaster..

[Larryboy_Dragon]

Gaddmeister wrote...
I have to disagree. For example, selecting a target was tedious if there were many enemies on screen at the same time as you had to scroll through a whole bunch of targets until you found the one you were looking for. Or perhaps you wanted to move your archer to higher ground? Then you had to select him/her and actively run away to the new position without the ability to see or control what happened to your other party members during that time. Let's face it, the console controls were not as good as their pc counterparts.

Oh, I didn’t mean to imply that they were. I mean, they worked fine for melee, but they were less then ideal for archer or mage. Having said that, nearer the end I was getting pretty good at it, and the ability to pre-program your companions meant that they weren’t acting too mental while I was repositioning my mage/archer characters.
The PC controls are clearly better.

bjdbwea wrote...
The reason such games belong on PCs is, as I said, because mouse and keyboard are the only input method that works properly. That's actually true for many games. Just because it can be made to work on consoles - somehow - doesn't make it less true. KotoR is a good example. As great as it was, the PC version could've been much better if it didn't have the compromised console interface.

I disagree. The console controls are less ideal then the PC controls, but taken on their own they are perfectly serviceable. I’d have liked a proper pause and the ability to queue (ala KotOR), but those are features that could have been added rather then a fault of the combat system.
Obviously, I’d support different controls for each version, tailored for each controller.

bjdbwea wrote...
So that DA 2 apparently will have a different system for PC and consoles is the first thing I read about it that I like. Hopefully it'll turn out true and well done.

I’m all for different specialised controls on each system.
But the article said that the console versions have their own combat system. Combat system implies more then just controls.

[Larryboy_Dragon]

Eshme wrote...

Hasnt it been for Dragon Age, that the console difficulty was lower, alone friendly fire and amount of enemies.
 

Console had enemies that came in waves. Higher difficulties still had friendly fire

[bjdbwea]

Larryboy_Dragon wrote...

I’m all for different specialised controls on each system.
But the article said that the console versions have their own combat system. Combat system implies more then just controls.

Indeed. But BioWare/EA apparently think you console gamers all want action! action! action! Good luck trying to convince them otherwise. If they think PC gamers want a more "classic" RPG combat system and if - that's a big IF - they actually provide that, I for one wouldn't mind that at all.

But I really don't think there's going to be much difference between the combat systems. It has to be exaggerated rumors. That would go against all the "streamlining" and saving of time and resources that have been going on recently at BioWare.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 13 juillet 2010 - 11:31 .

[Larryboy_Dragon]

bjdbwea wrote...
Indeed. But BioWare/EA apparently think you console gamers all want action! action! action! Good luck trying to convince them otherwise. If they think PC gamers want a more "classic" RPG combat system and if - that's a big IF - they actually provide that, I for one wouldn't mind that at all.

I hesitate to point it out, but Dragon Age was in the oven before NWN2 came out – and it was cooking until the end of last year. The bulk of it was done before they went to live under EA’s umbrella.
The EA of 2010 is a lot different then the borg-like money monster it was previously, but I still worry that EA have pressured Bioware to make a Dragon Age 2 that looks like the trailers that EA’s marketing team made for Dragon Age: Origins… those Marilyn Manson backed monstrosities. New s#$% indeed.

Modifié par Larryboy_Dragon, 14 juillet 2010 - 12:41 .

[Larryboy_Dragon]

bjdbwea wrote...

But I really don't think there's going to be much difference between the combat systems. It has to be exaggerated rumors. That would go against all the "streamlining" and saving of time and resources that have been going on recently at BioWare.

"Rather than try to mimic the PC experience on consoles", the GI report states, "Dragon Age II has a battle system more tailored to the strengths of the PS3 and 360."