197 réponses à ce sujet

[Narreneth]

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

Narreneth wrote...

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...


1. I think none of those things.  I do think however that I've put a hell of a lot more time into the game than the majority of people. (Unless you think it's common for people to play the game for 200+ hours, read both the books, buy most of the DLC, and do modding work for the game) It doesn't grant me more authority over Bioware certainly, but I think it does give me some allowance to be a bit dismissive of comments from people who clearly haven't done the same. Certainly don't mean to pick out posters on these boards, as there's no way for me to know whose done what. referring mostly to people outside of these boards, mostly on other gaming websites.  From what I've seen: the majority of people have only finished the game once.  And most of their criticisms are not complaints that I see often on these boards. (No VO, Combat not actiony enough etc)  The people who have those complaints may not be wrong: but I feel they are wrong so I shall respond as if they are wrong.  T'is called opinion.  Fancy that.   

If someone is truly indifferent to the changes then they shouldn't **** about me being against them, and if someone likes the changes then perhaps they should form a counter-argument as to why those changes benefit the game instead instead of focusing on attacking people against those changes claiming they're "elitist" and all that other bull****.  (Hells perhaps they have, but I haven't seen it)


2. Traditional RPG is a term that grows increasingly more relevant as time goes on.  A traditional RPG is simple to define really: It's an RPG that predominately features elements of RPG games of the past.  We live in an age where nearly every game under the sun has "RPG elements", we need some way to differentiate between 'real RPGs" and "Games with RPG elements".  Traditional RPG is the term we used to do that.  

3.DA:O was a hard game for plenty of people.  I know I struggled my first time through.  Now that I've played a bit more it's certainly easier and Nightmare is actually fairly simple at this point but that is true of any game.  I've recently started playing Baldur's Gate 2 for the first time and I'm intimidated as hell by it so I'm just playing through on Easy at the moment, but I've no doubt that some people play through it Solo, Naked and with intentional suboptimal builds on the hardest difficulty.  


So yes while I do generalize massively saying "Those darn casuals are ruining mah dragon age", it's not entirely untrue.  "Dumbing Down" has been an industry trend for the better part of the current console generation, and we've witnessed it dozens of times.  I'm not happy at the prospect of one of my favourite game series being "dumbed down" and sometimes that manifest itself as gross generalizations.  Hell, it may even turn out to be an unfounded worry.  That'd sure be nice. 

EDIT:

And considering we just watched the forementioned "dumbing-down" happen with ME2, our fears have precedent within Bioware and not just the industry.

First and foremost, no it is not uncommon for people to have invested over 200 hours of gametime to DA:O and it is certainly not uncommon for them to have all the DLC.  I certainly do.  Having done that does not give you (or me) any more validity than someone who has played the game only once or twice.  It's very strange that you would think that way.

Second, you still haven't defined what traditional RPG means.  You've simply said "it's like old games."  The thing is, even going back to "old" games you find vast amounts of differences from one to the next.  If you're referring to being like tabletop RPGs, then no video game has ever or will ever come close to the open-endedness of that. 

On Mass Effect 2:  ME2 was not dumbed down.  They took parts of the game out (some of which I miss, such as the inventory) that they felt catered to the feel of Mass Effect as a whole.  The combat system was virtually identical (obviously there were changes, such as the addition of ammo and the removal of weapon skills) and the character choices and dialogue options were still there just as they were in the first installment to provide the roleplaying elements of the game.  I thoroughly enjoyed Mass Effect 2.  That said, bringing Mass Effect 2 into this discussion as often has been done is more or less baseless.  ME and DA are not done by the same development teams, so while they may end up borrowing concepts from one another, they are not going to mimic each other.  Though I'll gladly go on record as saying that were that to happen, I'd drop the one mimicing the other in a heartbeat.  I don't want Dragon Age to be Mass Effect and I don't want Mass Effect to be Dragon Age.  
(A dialogue wheel that hasn't shown it's implementation yet certainly does not make DA2 like ME2 by any stretch of the definition)

Well I'd hardly say the people on these boards are an accurate representation of the majority of the community.  I'm not saying it gives me more validty or authority: more that it means that I care deeply about this series and feel like if it doesn't appear to be something made for people like me (the hardcore fans) then who are they making it for. (Then we point to casuals because they're the most likely culprit)  I mean I don't expect them to listen to me over anyone else, it's just that I feel that they're not saying anything that makes me go "Wow, I'm so glad they're doing that: it will surely improve the game".  The best case scenario here is that I'm overreacting and the wheel isn't as bad as I thought.  What are the benefits to the wheel over a simple dialogue tree like DA:O?  On the backend it's practically identical.  Why make the stupid wheel?  Why have two separate combat systems for consoles and PC?  Does that mean that one system will get less attention than the other?  (Regardless of what Bioware says, it's pretty much guaranteed that the new system will have more work put into it than improving the old one)  The only good news is that Bioware is trying something new narratively, but then again who knows if they can even pull it off. (I was real excited about importing my saved game into ME2 until I did it and realized that it really changed nothing besides adding a couple of NPC's to the world and changing some dialogue lines.  Makes me real worried about ME3 too)  All of the changes they've made so far are to address the complaints of the casual fanbase, not the hardcore crowd. Namely Graphics, Combat and the lack of PC voice acting. (Aside from the new narrative and the accompanying Hawke character)    

There's just too many parallels to ME2, which I'll touch on in a bit.



Then I'll further define "traditional RPG".  It's a term that refers to games regarded as "classic RPGs" mostly referring to the early 90s of PC RPG gaming with games such as Fallout 1&2, Planescape Torment, Baldurs Gate 1&2, Icewind Dale and all of that good stuff.  The mechanics and ideas in these games (Tactical Combat, Dialogue interaction, Branching Storylines, Large Open Worlds, class/stat based character creation with tons of depth etc) are what makes a traditional RPG.  Certainly the mechanics of RPG's are numerous and permeate in nearly every genre, but when people refer to traditional RPG's they think of these games and what they did.  Certainly, DA:O is a more simplified version of these games.  It's a simple fact that with today's development demands, it's much costly and difficult to have the same wealth of options available to the player.  (Which is why I'm of the opinion that developers of such games should strive to make a solid base with which to build upon through expansions and sequels)   However, what excited people about DA:O is that it wasn't afraid to ignore common trends in the industry and the genre in favour of trying to implement as many of these mechanics as it could. (Such as the Tactical Combat in favour of a more action oriented system or even a simpler one like KOTOR had)  

ME2 certainly wasn't a bad game, but the design of it was.  They pretty much decided  "If it didn't work in the first game get rid of it entirely" and as a result they loss the little bit of depth that was gained from equipment mods and various stats and exploring the galaxy.  (ME1 wasn't exactly a very deep game either, but the sequel was certainly shallower)    It was a nice 35 hour romp but it had no replayability whatsoever.  

I disagree about ME2 having no replayability.  I also take issue with your definition of depth.  That's neither here nor there, those games are not the topic of this discussion so I'll mvoe on.

If you're taking issue with the wheel just for being a wheel, that seems rather silly to me.  The wheel is supposed to be there so you can respond in a quicker and more fluid manner to keep the scenes moving smoothly without having those 3 minute awkward pauses that happen occasionally when you hunt for which quotation matches what you want to say the most.   As far as the separate combat systems go, the way I'm reading it is not that the combat systems will be drastically different, but that the Console version will simply have its combat fitted to the controller better.  Having played both the console and PC version of DA:O I can say that the PC version felt smooth while the console version (I prefer to play my single player RPGs on console) combat felt clunky and poorly ported at times. 

The games you listed as traditional RPGs all have drastically different gameplay elements to them.  Some of the RPGs from that era are turn based.  As far as stat-based creation, Dragon Age accomplished that on a level that was stat-based leveling.  You didn't have a Warrior with 65 Magic, nor did you have a Mage with 70 Agility.  The stats you chose to develop were numerous enough that they made a difference in capability (ie taking more Dex for a Dual-Wielding Warrior, or picking up extra cunning for a damage bonus if you specialized Assassin on a rogue).  This system has not been taken out of DA2 (in fact, based on some of the tiny side comments that have been made I'd expect to see it expanded upon).  If character development is what makes an RPG traditional, then I think DA2 is going to be just as traditional as DAO was.

[wolfy30141]

N7xWolf wrote...

wolfy30141 wrote...

I agree with OP, there is nothing that has been shown to suggest that Bioware hasn't got something up there sleeve to make this a great game. I mean, simply look at all the other games Bioware has made? How many of them have gone on to be some of the most memorable games you've ever played? DA:O was a great game as well, HOWEVER, any great game can still have improvement. That's what Bioware was thinking. With the VO they were trying to break the mold some more and allow for further innovation in the game design. As far as people going on and on about how they know they won't like this game, and how much they think it's going to just flat out tank, I pose this question, "How can you honestly make an informed decision based off of a couple of paragraphs, 2 pictures, and some discussions?" It makes no sense. At least wait for more information before you go and bash a game. It really makes you seem like you're on a nerd rage when you just bash something for no particular reason. At least voice what's wrong instead of just saying something like "Bioware is betraying the fans!; Bioware doesn't listen!; DA2 is going to be retarded." Statements like this almost make me ashamed of the gaming community, or rather, the small minority who thinks that they have the right to just go ahead and open their mouths. I know it must seem like I'm on a soap box, and I know it may seem harsh, but what I'm trying to get through to some of you is that there is never a reason to bash a game developer. Constructive criticism is good, but going on a nerd rage and simply trash talking the developer or there game is not a good way to make a change. Explain what's wrong, (in this case seems to be the VO which you never know, could be a surprise or two in store for it) and try to show them a course that you'd like to see. I mean only a couple of weeks ago, I saw a lot of people saying, "All I want is a plot twist." Well, you got it. Also, there's no information as of yet to suggest the player won't be able to link the two stories. Bioware might not continue with that same story, however, remnants of the story are sure to be in the main story of this game as well. Maybe we'll finally come to a conclusion on some of the things that were missing in the old one, I don't know, and neither do you. IF I haven't even made a dent in some of yall then I have only one thing left to say, download some appropriate software and MAKE YOUR OWN GAME. As an afterthought. You should probably do that, and even have a forum available for it, just to see what other people might think. I'm just saying, if you think you know better, then there's a lot of money in it if you're right.

you sir, deserve a medal and a plate of brownies.

yum, Brownies

[Narreneth]

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

Bioware is not a little kid being picked on in the schoolyard. Don't feel sorry for it, it's a company. Sure people work there but they WORK there, they aren't hippy sit-down protestors whose interpretive dancing while doing drugs is percieved by ultra-liberals as "art." Most criticism on these boards is directed in a constructive way, or at least starts so by intention. If you have to feel sorry for an entity feel sorry for a forum moderator who has to police all the garbage that is written. Don't feel too sorry though, hopefully they do get paid..

I like how you snuck in a political attack that had nothing to do with your point or this thread in there.  Way to be completely irrelevant.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

People shouldn't be rude or insulting. If they are it says more about the person than it should demean the company as a whole. Should a company be protected from all criticism though? No, constructive criticism helps a company if anyone reads what is being said and there are enough people saying it.



And yes, you are correct. We should wait for more information. My main criticisms are about what HAS been released so far, game mechanics concerns and character creation options. Right now I won't be buying DA 2, I loved DA:O. Will that change? Possibly, nothing is impossible. Bioware is one of my favorite game companies, they do excellent work on average.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Narreneth wrote...

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

Bioware is not a little kid being picked on in the schoolyard. Don't feel sorry for it, it's a company. Sure people work there but they WORK there, they aren't hippy sit-down protestors whose interpretive dancing while doing drugs is percieved by ultra-liberals as "art." Most criticism on these boards is directed in a constructive way, or at least starts so by intention. If you have to feel sorry for an entity feel sorry for a forum moderator who has to police all the garbage that is written. Don't feel too sorry though, hopefully they do get paid..

I like how you snuck in a political attack that had nothing to do with your point or this thread in there.  Way to be completely irrelevant.

Actually that's your interpretation, my comment wasn't politically targeting anyone. If it somehow insulted you then I apologize. I was just trying to take a humorous stab at an extreme point of view. It is in poor taste I suppose, but everyone is so darn politically correct these days that the world is turning quite bland and coddled.

[wolfy30141]

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

People shouldn't be rude or insulting. If they are it says more about the person than it should demean the company as a whole. Should a company be protected from all criticism though? No, constructive criticism helps a company if anyone reads what is being said and there are enough people saying it.

And yes, you are correct. We should wait for more information. My main criticisms are about what HAS been released so far, game mechanics concerns and character creation options. Right now I won't be buying DA 2, I loved DA:O. Will that change? Possibly, nothing is impossible. Bioware is one of my favorite game companies, they do excellent work on average.

Then I have no problem with you or your voicing of opinion, simply because you know what you you're talking about. You dislike the character creation possibilities so far, that I can respect. I have asked that about several games myself. However, you do get the gist of what I was saying earlier somewhat. I agree that no company should be free of criticism, however, criticism should be as you have done with my post, informed and direct. That's all I can wish from the forums. I mean, is that not what they are about? Informed and educated discussion on the topic? That's all I'm saying, and that's why I feel like Bioware should be given just a little slack.

[supertails15]

even thought it was annouced less then a week ago they already got rid of the main things i want in the next game

[Shadow_Wolf_Sniper]

wolfy30141 wrote...

I agree with OP, there is nothing that has been shown to suggest that Bioware hasn't got something up there sleeve to make this a great game. I mean, simply look at all the other games Bioware has made? How many of them have gone on to be some of the most memorable games you've ever played? DA:O was a great game as well, HOWEVER, any great game can still have improvement. That's what Bioware was thinking. With the VO they were trying to break the mold some more and allow for further innovation in the game design. As far as people going on and on about how they know they won't like this game, and how much they think it's going to just flat out tank, I pose this question, "How can you honestly make an informed decision based off of a couple of paragraphs, 2 pictures, and some discussions?" It makes no sense. At least wait for more information before you go and bash a game. It really makes you seem like you're on a nerd rage when you just bash something for no particular reason. At least voice what's wrong instead of just saying something like "Bioware is betraying the fans!; Bioware doesn't listen!; DA2 is going to be retarded." Statements like this almost make me ashamed of the gaming community, or rather, the small minority who thinks that they have the right to just go ahead and open their mouths. I know it must seem like I'm on a soap box, and I know it may seem harsh, but what I'm trying to get through to some of you is that there is never a reason to bash a game developer. Constructive criticism is good, but going on a nerd rage and simply trash talking the developer or there game is not a good way to make a change. Explain what's wrong, (in this case seems to be the VO which you never know, could be a surprise or two in store for it) and try to show them a course that you'd like to see. I mean only a couple of weeks ago, I saw a lot of people saying, "All I want is a plot twist." Well, you got it. Also, there's no information as of yet to suggest the player won't be able to link the two stories. Bioware might not continue with that same story, however, remnants of the story are sure to be in the main story of this game as well. Maybe we'll finally come to a conclusion on some of the things that were missing in the old one, I don't know, and neither do you. IF I haven't even made a dent in some of yall then I have only one thing left to say, download some appropriate software and MAKE YOUR OWN GAME. As an afterthought. You should probably do that, and even have a forum available for it, just to see what other people might think. I'm just saying, if you think you know better, then there's a lot of money in it if you're right.

PWNAGE!

[Narreneth]

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

Narreneth wrote...

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

Bioware is not a little kid being picked on in the schoolyard. Don't feel sorry for it, it's a company. Sure people work there but they WORK there, they aren't hippy sit-down protestors whose interpretive dancing while doing drugs is percieved by ultra-liberals as "art." Most criticism on these boards is directed in a constructive way, or at least starts so by intention. If you have to feel sorry for an entity feel sorry for a forum moderator who has to police all the garbage that is written. Don't feel too sorry though, hopefully they do get paid..

I like how you snuck in a political attack that had nothing to do with your point or this thread in there.  Way to be completely irrelevant.

Actually that's your interpretation, my comment wasn't politically targeting anyone. If it somehow insulted you then I apologize. I was just trying to take a humorous stab at an extreme point of view. It is in poor taste I suppose, but everyone is so darn politically correct these days that the world is turning quite bland and coddled.

Didn't offend me at all.  Just seemed extremely off point and motivated by "sticking it to the liberals" in a place that has nothing to do with anything.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

I agree with you Wolfy. If only we all could live in such a world. Sadly, the internet is a pretty rude place, that's what forum mods are for I guess. I also get your points, I just am tired from work and cannot get to sleep yet so I'm replying for the heck of it while browsing the forums.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Narreneth wrote...

Didn't offend me at all.  Just seemed extremely off point and motivated by "sticking it to the liberals" in a place that has nothing to do with anything.

I'm glad you aren't offended. And no, that wasn't the motivation at all. I would further explain each detail of my post but it would only derail this thread even more. I wrote then erased two paragraphs explaining my post but this is getting kind of rediculous so I'm just going to drop it for the sake of everyone, including me!

Back on topic, this thread is about people unnecessarily giving Bioware smack-talk!

Modifié par Ryllen Laerth Kriel, 14 juillet 2010 - 04:21 .

[jennamarae]

Feeling sorry for Bioware just because people dislike and criticize the details they've released thus far about DA2 makes about as much sense as feeling sorry for BP just because people criticize their ability to safely run an oil rig. Disagreeing with the decisions Bioware made (and has announced) for DA2, including changes to game mechanics, features, and the addition of a VO for the PC, is not whining regardless of how many times people try to claim it is. I swear, some of you are like the bully on the playground. Only happy when you're putting someone else down and calling them names. What's next? Stealing our lunch money? Pushing us into mud holes? <_<

[Wilyfox]

I'm sorry to butt in, but somebody commented earlier about "classic RPG's like "Baldurs Gate etc..."

Forgive me for arguing, but they were just glitzy rip-offs of "Pools of Radience, Secret of the Silver Blade, Curse of the Azurer Bond" which were also set in the Forgotten Realms setting...

Having played DA:O for about 200+ hours, I am a bit sad that there is no continuation of my (assorted) Wardens... but I'm happy to wait and see...



cheers

[Narreneth]

jennamarae wrote...

Feeling sorry for Bioware just because people dislike and criticize the details they've released thus far about DA2 makes about as much sense as feeling sorry for BP just because people criticize their ability to safely run an oil rig. Disagreeing with the decisions Bioware made (and has announced) for DA2, including changes to game mechanics, features, and the addition of a VO for the PC, is not whining regardless of how many times people try to claim it is. I swear, some of you are like the bully on the playground. Only happy when you're putting someone else down and calling them names. What's next? Stealing our lunch money? Pushing us into mud holes? <_<

It's whining when it goes to the extent that many of the forumites have taken it to.  There's a difference between voicing an opinion and being a complete ass about something.  Does everyone do it?  No.  Sad to say that the greater majority of the posts I've seen today though have been done with that ass-y kind of a tone.

As far as the name-calling goes I've seen a lot more of it coming from the people who are against changes than for or indifferent to them.  Those who are against it have been calling people who enjoy action RPGs things like "casual idiots" "stupid" "uncreative" and accusing them of not only having a lack of imagination but a lack of taste or validity of opinion.  The most I've seen from the other side has been to tell people they're whining and occasionally telling a person that uses the phrase "Dragon Effect" an idiot.

Essentially what I'm saying is:  pot, meet kettle.

[jennamarae]

Narreneth wrote...
It's whining when it goes to the extent that many of the forumites have taken it to.  There's a difference between voicing an opinion and being a complete ass about something.  Does everyone do it?  No.  Sad to say that the greater majority of the posts I've seen today though have been done with that ass-y kind of a tone.

I find that odd because most of the posts I've seen over the last week haven't had an "ass-y" tone. The majority of them have been posts where people voiced their opinion and disapproval without being an ass about it only to have someone quote their post and call them a whiner, baby, etc. Only then have some of them gotten hateful about it, and I can't say I particularly blame them for responding to a personal attack in a hateful manner. Perhaps it's not the majority of posters who have voiced disapproval but your perception of those posts that makes it seem like they're being an ass.

As far as the name-calling goes I've seen a lot more of it coming from the people who are against changes than for or indifferent to them.  Those who are against it have been calling people who enjoy action RPGs things like "casual idiots" "stupid" "uncreative" and accusing them of not only having a lack of imagination but a lack of taste or validity of opinion.  The most I've seen from the other side has been to tell people they're whining and occasionally telling a person that uses the phrase "Dragon Effect" an idiot.

Again, perhaps that's your perception of it but I haven't seen that from the majority of those who disapprove of the changes announced thus far. Taking the comments of one person and applying them to the majority is a massive exaggeration.

Essentially what I'm saying is:  pot, meet kettle.

Had I attacked a particular person with my bully comment that would make sense, but I didn't. I used a simile. Not even in the same ballpark as namecalling and personal attacks.

Modifié par jennamarae, 14 juillet 2010 - 05:10 .

[Kalfear]

Narreneth wrote...

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

Narreneth wrote...

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

Bioware is not a little kid being picked on in the schoolyard. Don't feel sorry for it, it's a company. Sure people work there but they WORK there, they aren't hippy sit-down protestors whose interpretive dancing while doing drugs is percieved by ultra-liberals as "art." Most criticism on these boards is directed in a constructive way, or at least starts so by intention. If you have to feel sorry for an entity feel sorry for a forum moderator who has to police all the garbage that is written. Don't feel too sorry though, hopefully they do get paid..

I like how you snuck in a political attack that had nothing to do with your point or this thread in there.  Way to be completely irrelevant.

Actually that's your interpretation, my comment wasn't politically targeting anyone. If it somehow insulted you then I apologize. I was just trying to take a humorous stab at an extreme point of view. It is in poor taste I suppose, but everyone is so darn politically correct these days that the world is turning quite bland and coddled.

Didn't offend me at all.  Just seemed extremely off point and motivated by "sticking it to the liberals" in a place that has nothing to do with anything.

heh, its never a bad time or place to take a crack at a liberal :PPP LOL

Narreneth wrote...
I disagree about ME2 having no replayability.

/shrug.

I played the game 1.5 times.
Thats 1-1.5 times more then anyone in my crowd (which is made up of old school RPG players)
Game went over moderately well (wasnt a mega hit or even Bioware biggest selling game) with shooter driven players though
So if your into shooter, I would hope you got replayability from it.

[Atomic Space Vixen]

quote]uberdowzen wrote...

[quote]Atomic Space Vixen wrote...

So let me see if I have this right... Wait until it's too late to make a difference to let our concerns be known.

Sure. Okay.[/quote]

No
but at least wait until you've read a preview of the game. At this
point you have next to no idea what the game is going to be like. It
could be rubbish, it could be just as good as Origins or it could be
even better. No one outside of Bioware has enough information to judge.

[/quote]
By the time I've read a preview of the game, it will be faaarrrr too late to make any sort of difference, even minor. However, we do have some information already and get to compare that to how they did so well in screwing up the Mass Effect franchise (disclaimer: in my opinion).

[quote]Bryy_Miller wrote...

[quote]Atomic Space Vixen wrote...

So let me see if I have this right... Wait until it's too late to make a difference to let our concerns be known.

Sure. Okay.[/quote]

Any real chance to make any kind of difference is most likely gone by now.
[/quote]
I know. I also know I don't fall within their target demographic in any way so even if it wasn't too late, they'd never listen to me anyway. However, I do have discretionary income and have stopped buying DLC. They won't miss the lost income, but I feel better not encouraging BW's unfortunate downward spiral.

[Narreneth]

jennamarae wrote...

Narreneth wrote...
It's whining when it goes to the extent that many of the forumites have taken it to.  There's a difference between voicing an opinion and being a complete ass about something.  Does everyone do it?  No.  Sad to say that the greater majority of the posts I've seen today though have been done with that ass-y kind of a tone.

I find that odd because most of the posts I've seen over the last week haven't had an "ass-y" tone. The majority of them have been posts where people voiced their opinion and disapproval without being an ass about it only to have someone quote their post and call them a whiner, baby, etc. Only then have some of them gotten hateful about it, and I can't say I particularly blame them for responding to a personal attack in a hateful manner. Perhaps it's not the majority of posters who have voiced disapproval but your perception of those posts that makes it seem like they're being an ass.

As far as the name-calling goes I've seen a lot more of it coming from the people who are against changes than for or indifferent to them.  Those who are against it have been calling people who enjoy action RPGs things like "casual idiots" "stupid" "uncreative" and accusing them of not only having a lack of imagination but a lack of taste or validity of opinion.  The most I've seen from the other side has been to tell people they're whining and occasionally telling a person that uses the phrase "Dragon Effect" an idiot.

Again, perhaps that's your perception of it but I haven't seen that from the majority of those who disapprove of the changes announced thus far. Taking the comments of one person and applying them to the majority is a massive exaggeration.

Essentially what I'm saying is:  pot, meet kettle.

Had I attacked a particular person with my bully comment that would make sense, but I didn't. I used a simile. Not even in the same ballpark as namecalling and personal attacks.

Apparently you haven't been reading the posts.  That or you have a tendency to believe that people who agree with you are always the "good guys" and people who don't are always the "bad guys"  (I'm kind of leaning towards that being that you have already voiced that all these people have been provoked by the evil change-supporting insult hordes that are swarming this forums!)

Simply adding the word "like" when calling a group of people "bullies" and comparing their antics to school children is an attack.  Don't try to pretend that it's not.

[SithLordExarKun]

wolfy30141 wrote...

I agree with OP, there is nothing that has been shown to suggest that Bioware hasn't got something up there sleeve to make this a great game. I mean, simply look at all the other games Bioware has made? How many of them have gone on to be some of the most memorable games you've ever played? DA:O was a great game as well, HOWEVER, any great game can still have improvement. That's what Bioware was thinking. With the VO they were trying to break the mold some more and allow for further innovation in the game design. As far as people going on and on about how they know they won't like this game, and how much they think it's going to just flat out tank, I pose this question, "How can you honestly make an informed decision based off of a couple of paragraphs, 2 pictures, and some discussions?" It makes no sense. At least wait for more information before you go and bash a game. It really makes you seem like you're on a nerd rage when you just bash something for no particular reason. At least voice what's wrong instead of just saying something like "Bioware is betraying the fans!; Bioware doesn't listen!; DA2 is going to be retarded." Statements like this almost make me ashamed of the gaming community, or rather, the small minority who thinks that they have the right to just go ahead and open their mouths. I know it must seem like I'm on a soap box, and I know it may seem harsh, but what I'm trying to get through to some of you is that there is never a reason to bash a game developer. Constructive criticism is good, but going on a nerd rage and simply trash talking the developer or there game is not a good way to make a change. Explain what's wrong, (in this case seems to be the VO which you never know, could be a surprise or two in store for it) and try to show them a course that you'd like to see. I mean only a couple of weeks ago, I saw a lot of people saying, "All I want is a plot twist." Well, you got it. Also, there's no information as of yet to suggest the player won't be able to link the two stories. Bioware might not continue with that same story, however, remnants of the story are sure to be in the main story of this game as well. Maybe we'll finally come to a conclusion on some of the things that were missing in the old one, I don't know, and neither do you. IF I haven't even made a dent in some of yall then I have only one thing left to say, download some appropriate software and MAKE YOUR OWN GAME. As an afterthought. You should probably do that, and even have a forum available for it, just to see what other people might think. I'm just saying, if you think you know better, then there's a lot of money in it if you're right.

You sir speak the truth. No offence but some of these fans on these boards are among the worst kind of people you can meet on a gaming board, hell far worse that the angry shooter fans on the MW2 boards.

[ITSSEXYTIME]

Narreneth wrote...

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

Narreneth wrote...

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...


1. I think none of those things.  I do think however that I've put a hell of a lot more time into the game than the majority of people. (Unless you think it's common for people to play the game for 200+ hours, read both the books, buy most of the DLC, and do modding work for the game) It doesn't grant me more authority over Bioware certainly, but I think it does give me some allowance to be a bit dismissive of comments from people who clearly haven't done the same. Certainly don't mean to pick out posters on these boards, as there's no way for me to know whose done what. referring mostly to people outside of these boards, mostly on other gaming websites.  From what I've seen: the majority of people have only finished the game once.  And most of their criticisms are not complaints that I see often on these boards. (No VO, Combat not actiony enough etc)  The people who have those complaints may not be wrong: but I feel they are wrong so I shall respond as if they are wrong.  T'is called opinion.  Fancy that.   

If someone is truly indifferent to the changes then they shouldn't **** about me being against them, and if someone likes the changes then perhaps they should form a counter-argument as to why those changes benefit the game instead instead of focusing on attacking people against those changes claiming they're "elitist" and all that other bull****.  (Hells perhaps they have, but I haven't seen it)


2. Traditional RPG is a term that grows increasingly more relevant as time goes on.  A traditional RPG is simple to define really: It's an RPG that predominately features elements of RPG games of the past.  We live in an age where nearly every game under the sun has "RPG elements", we need some way to differentiate between 'real RPGs" and "Games with RPG elements".  Traditional RPG is the term we used to do that.  

3.DA:O was a hard game for plenty of people.  I know I struggled my first time through.  Now that I've played a bit more it's certainly easier and Nightmare is actually fairly simple at this point but that is true of any game.  I've recently started playing Baldur's Gate 2 for the first time and I'm intimidated as hell by it so I'm just playing through on Easy at the moment, but I've no doubt that some people play through it Solo, Naked and with intentional suboptimal builds on the hardest difficulty.  


So yes while I do generalize massively saying "Those darn casuals are ruining mah dragon age", it's not entirely untrue.  "Dumbing Down" has been an industry trend for the better part of the current console generation, and we've witnessed it dozens of times.  I'm not happy at the prospect of one of my favourite game series being "dumbed down" and sometimes that manifest itself as gross generalizations.  Hell, it may even turn out to be an unfounded worry.  That'd sure be nice. 

EDIT:

And considering we just watched the forementioned "dumbing-down" happen with ME2, our fears have precedent within Bioware and not just the industry.

First and foremost, no it is not uncommon for people to have invested over 200 hours of gametime to DA:O and it is certainly not uncommon for them to have all the DLC.  I certainly do.  Having done that does not give you (or me) any more validity than someone who has played the game only once or twice.  It's very strange that you would think that way.

Second, you still haven't defined what traditional RPG means.  You've simply said "it's like old games."  The thing is, even going back to "old" games you find vast amounts of differences from one to the next.  If you're referring to being like tabletop RPGs, then no video game has ever or will ever come close to the open-endedness of that. 

On Mass Effect 2:  ME2 was not dumbed down.  They took parts of the game out (some of which I miss, such as the inventory) that they felt catered to the feel of Mass Effect as a whole.  The combat system was virtually identical (obviously there were changes, such as the addition of ammo and the removal of weapon skills) and the character choices and dialogue options were still there just as they were in the first installment to provide the roleplaying elements of the game.  I thoroughly enjoyed Mass Effect 2.  That said, bringing Mass Effect 2 into this discussion as often has been done is more or less baseless.  ME and DA are not done by the same development teams, so while they may end up borrowing concepts from one another, they are not going to mimic each other.  Though I'll gladly go on record as saying that were that to happen, I'd drop the one mimicing the other in a heartbeat.  I don't want Dragon Age to be Mass Effect and I don't want Mass Effect to be Dragon Age.  
(A dialogue wheel that hasn't shown it's implementation yet certainly does not make DA2 like ME2 by any stretch of the definition)

Well I'd hardly say the people on these boards are an accurate representation of the majority of the community.  I'm not saying it gives me more validty or authority: more that it means that I care deeply about this series and feel like if it doesn't appear to be something made for people like me (the hardcore fans) then who are they making it for. (Then we point to casuals because they're the most likely culprit)  I mean I don't expect them to listen to me over anyone else, it's just that I feel that they're not saying anything that makes me go "Wow, I'm so glad they're doing that: it will surely improve the game".  The best case scenario here is that I'm overreacting and the wheel isn't as bad as I thought.  What are the benefits to the wheel over a simple dialogue tree like DA:O?  On the backend it's practically identical.  Why make the stupid wheel?  Why have two separate combat systems for consoles and PC?  Does that mean that one system will get less attention than the other?  (Regardless of what Bioware says, it's pretty much guaranteed that the new system will have more work put into it than improving the old one)  The only good news is that Bioware is trying something new narratively, but then again who knows if they can even pull it off. (I was real excited about importing my saved game into ME2 until I did it and realized that it really changed nothing besides adding a couple of NPC's to the world and changing some dialogue lines.  Makes me real worried about ME3 too)  All of the changes they've made so far are to address the complaints of the casual fanbase, not the hardcore crowd. Namely Graphics, Combat and the lack of PC voice acting. (Aside from the new narrative and the accompanying Hawke character)    

There's just too many parallels to ME2, which I'll touch on in a bit.



Then I'll further define "traditional RPG".  It's a term that refers to games regarded as "classic RPGs" mostly referring to the early 90s of PC RPG gaming with games such as Fallout 1&2, Planescape Torment, Baldurs Gate 1&2, Icewind Dale and all of that good stuff.  The mechanics and ideas in these games (Tactical Combat, Dialogue interaction, Branching Storylines, Large Open Worlds, class/stat based character creation with tons of depth etc) are what makes a traditional RPG.  Certainly the mechanics of RPG's are numerous and permeate in nearly every genre, but when people refer to traditional RPG's they think of these games and what they did.  Certainly, DA:O is a more simplified version of these games.  It's a simple fact that with today's development demands, it's much costly and difficult to have the same wealth of options available to the player.  (Which is why I'm of the opinion that developers of such games should strive to make a solid base with which to build upon through expansions and sequels)   However, what excited people about DA:O is that it wasn't afraid to ignore common trends in the industry and the genre in favour of trying to implement as many of these mechanics as it could. (Such as the Tactical Combat in favour of a more action oriented system or even a simpler one like KOTOR had)  

ME2 certainly wasn't a bad game, but the design of it was.  They pretty much decided  "If it didn't work in the first game get rid of it entirely" and as a result they loss the little bit of depth that was gained from equipment mods and various stats and exploring the galaxy.  (ME1 wasn't exactly a very deep game either, but the sequel was certainly shallower)    It was a nice 35 hour romp but it had no replayability whatsoever.  

I disagree about ME2 having no replayability.  I also take issue with your definition of depth.  That's neither here nor there, those games are not the topic of this discussion so I'll mvoe on.

If you're taking issue with the wheel just for being a wheel, that seems rather silly to me.  The wheel is supposed to be there so you can respond in a quicker and more fluid manner to keep the scenes moving smoothly without having those 3 minute awkward pauses that happen occasionally when you hunt for which quotation matches what you want to say the most.   As far as the separate combat systems go, the way I'm reading it is not that the combat systems will be drastically different, but that the Console version will simply have its combat fitted to the controller better.  Having played both the console and PC version of DA:O I can say that the PC version felt smooth while the console version (I prefer to play my single player RPGs on console) combat felt clunky and poorly ported at times. 

The games you listed as traditional RPGs all have drastically different gameplay elements to them.  Some of the RPGs from that era are turn based.  As far as stat-based creation, Dragon Age accomplished that on a level that was stat-based leveling.  You didn't have a Warrior with 65 Magic, nor did you have a Mage with 70 Agility.  The stats you chose to develop were numerous enough that they made a difference in capability (ie taking more Dex for a Dual-Wielding Warrior, or picking up extra cunning for a damage bonus if you specialized Assassin on a rogue).  This system has not been taken out of DA2 (in fact, based on some of the tiny side comments that have been made I'd expect to see it expanded upon).  If character development is what makes an RPG traditional, then I think DA2 is going to be just as traditional as DAO was.

The main issue I take with the wheel is that it takes more control away from the player.  In both ME1&2 and Alpha Protocol I've had plenty "I didn't mean THAT" moments.  When I'm trying to role play a specific character (Which I tend to do for repeated playthroughs of a game to keep things interesting) this can be incredibly frustrating.  I've no reason to believe that DA2's implementation will be different, as they haven't shown any of it and it's the same developer whom invented it and used it in 2 of the 3 games that I've used it in. (And  it seems they're taking an alpha protocol direction with it)

The elements are different but the point is that they share similar concepts: World altering decisions(Not necessarily *actual* decisions, could just be the player being able to change the world and the way it reacts to him), deep character creation and combat, and of course the story telling.  In most modern RPG's you see 1 or 2 of these, but rarely all 3. 

[jennamarae]

Narreneth wrote...

Apparently you haven't been reading the posts.  That or you have a tendency to believe that people who agree with you are always the "good guys" and people who don't are always the "bad guys"  (I'm kind of leaning towards that being that you have already voiced that all these people have been provoked by the evil change-supporting insult hordes that are swarming this forums!)

Absolutely incorrect on both counts. There go your perceptions again. I don't agree with you therefore I must see everyone I don't agree with as the "bad guys".

Simply adding the word "like" when calling a group of people "bullies" and comparing their antics to school children is an attack.  Don't try to pretend that it's not.

As I said, it's called a simile. I didn't say "you all are bullies". If I had it would have been an attack, but it wasn't. Don't attempt to put motives behind my posts that do not exist.

[DaringMoosejaw]

People don't post on gaming forums to heap praise on the developers. They do it because they want to **** and they think the developers are listening, thus perhaps changing things and getting what they want. Thinking otherwise belies far too much faith in humanity.

[Massadonious1]

As someone already said, it's way too long into the development process to change anything....major, anyway. Hawke will be voiced. Hawke will be human. Writing 4 paragraph diatribes about the perils of voiced protagonists or the need for more Origins seems kinda pointless.

Modifié par Massadonious1, 14 juillet 2010 - 06:06 .

[uberdowzen]

jennamarae wrote...

Feeling sorry for Bioware just because people dislike and criticize the details they've released thus far about DA2 makes about as much sense as feeling sorry for BP just because people criticize their ability to safely run an oil rig. Disagreeing with the decisions Bioware made (and has announced) for DA2, including changes to game mechanics, features, and the addition of a VO for the PC, is not whining regardless of how many times people try to claim it is. I swear, some of you are like the bully on the playground. Only happy when you're putting someone else down and calling them names. What's next? Stealing our lunch money? Pushing us into mud holes? <_<

I don't think politics should be brought into this but here goes. I do actually feel slightly sorry for BP, they're no worse than any of the other oil companies they just got unlucky. What happened out there could have happened to any of them. Maybe if people didn't rely so much on their cars/oil in general then rigs wouldn't be so strained and these kinds of tragic accidents wouldn't occur.

Also, even on the changes Bioware has announced there have been next to no details. Think about it, Bioware has said that there will be a voiced main character. Apparently this will kill roleplaying but you have no idea how many potential voices there will be or (this is unlikely buy I'm making a point) maybe you can customise a synthesized voice in the same way you can change your characters appearance. If they did that I personally think that would improve roleplaying. (On a sidenote I'm playing Gothic 2 right now which is a game with a voice protagonist. Does it have no roleplaying elements because you have a pre set voiced character?)

I'll provide an example of this that has already happened: on the DA2 site it says that "dynamic new combat mechanics that put you right in the heart of battle". Many people translated this as "action-y combat" and yet Bioware have said that the combat is going to be more or less identical on PC whereas there will be a new system on consoles.

[jennamarae]

uberdowzen wrote...

I don't think politics should be brought into this but here goes. I do actually feel slightly sorry for BP, they're no worse than any of the other oil companies they just got unlucky. What happened out there could have happened to any of them. Maybe if people didn't rely so much on their cars/oil in general then rigs wouldn't be so strained and these kinds of tragic accidents wouldn't occur.

Talking about BP isn't talking about politics, but I get your point. And yeah I do feel sorry for them in that it could have, and has, happened to any company that deals with oil. Doesn't absolve them of any blame though. But it's off topic, so moving on...

Also, even on the changes Bioware has announced there have been next to no details. Think about it, Bioware has said that there will be a voiced main character. Apparently this will kill roleplaying but you have no idea how many potential voices there will be or (this is unlikely buy I'm making a point) maybe you can customise a synthesized voice in the same way you can change your characters appearance. If they did that I personally think that would improve roleplaying. (On a sidenote I'm playing Gothic 2 right now which is a game with a voice protagonist. Does it have no roleplaying elements because you have a pre set voiced character?)

The few details they have released though are enough to make some question whether it will ultimately be a game they're willing to shell out $60+ for. It seems like most games being released lately have voiced PC's, DA2 having one isn't a great selling point for me. I can deal with it for a playthrough but it makes me more likely to rent or borrow and less likely to buy. Developers don't want people to rent, they want us to buy.

Having multiple voice actors would make little financial sense (they aren't cheap as Bioware has pointed out before) and would require more discs just for that alone. Chances are slim to none that we'll get to choose the voice we have to listen to for the entire game. If there were an option to change how the voice sounds, that would improve it and make it less bothersome for me. I don't see that happening either. It'll likely be dismissed as yet another magical toggle.

I've never played Gothic 2 so I can't comment on whether or not it has roleplaying elements, but that in itself is another issue. DAO feels like a real RPG to me, not just a game with roleplaying elements. The Witcher has roleplaying elements, but I don't see it as an RPG. Risen has roleplaying elements, but I don't see it as an RPG. ME and ME2 have roleplaying elements, but I don't see them as RPGs either. It's the voiced PC that kills roleplaying for me. I can't roleplay while listening to a voice actor every time my character says something. Doesn't mean that no game with a voiced PC is an RPG, I just can't roleplay while playing them. (And before anyone with twitchy fingers attempts to jump on me over that comment, no I'm not saying that my definition of RPG is the only and/or right one.)

I'll provide an example of this that has already happened: on the DA2 site it says that "dynamic new combat mechanics that put you right in the heart of battle". Many people translated this as "action-y combat" and yet Bioware have said that the combat is going to be more or less identical on PC whereas there will be a new system on consoles.

Here's the problem I have with that. It can't be "dynamic new combat mechanics" and yet be identical to what's in DAO. It's one or the other. It's like saying "new and improved", either it's new or it's something old that's been improved. With the combat mechanics, either they're new or they're the same ones from DAO. It can't be both. So which is it? Dynamic and new? Or identical to what we already have? Either way "action-y" combat doesn't bother me. It's not a deal-breaker or maker as long as it works and doesn't leave me thinking "that's just ridiculous".