46 réponses à ce sujet

[Tollak_Grippsson]

Note: i did a serch first, but no similar discussion topic as I could tell.

As someone on the GameInformer forums stated, "They better not cut out the RPG elements like they did to Mass Effect 2."  This worries me greatly due to the mention of a single protagonist (so far).  Granted, the ME 'franchise' is a Space-based adventure.  Space is not a tratidional (dark) fantasy setting as most rpg 'experts'/players might proclaim.  However, I am one of those people who liked Bioware's original ME rpg-based space setting because it was new to the Space-based game genre as far as I know compared to the "shooter" genre that ME2 seems to fall under. 

Dr. Muzyka states , and I quote, “Dragon Age 2 will simultaneously deliver an epic story and set a new
bar for intense action in the genre.”, as well as saying, "players will be able to 'think like a general and fight like a Spartan,'”  This, unforturnately, sounds as though Bioware is taking a similar approach in DA2 as they did in ME2, and therefore, in my opinion, removing the rpg aspect of the Dragon Age dark fantasy setting,  As Bioware approached Green Ronin to create a dark fantasy pnp rpg based on the DA world, I am hoping that the DA franchise remains true to the "Origin"al presentation of the DA universe. 
You must remember, however, that ME was originally a console game which was later ported to the PC, and most console games are fast-paced compared to the DA crpg where there was much one could do in terms of precisely directing party members' actions, especially through pause-and-play.  And also remember that DA was originally a PC-based game, and then transferred to consoles.  This role reversal may influence whether or not DA2 remains true to its predecessor's traditional PC rpg-based background.  I think that this difference is a crucial difference between the DA franchise and the ME franchise.

On a different tangent, I remember an early slip of info mentioning that DA2 will take place at the end of the Dragon age, around Dragon Age 70 and therefore the original party members will definitely not be participants in DA2.  i  thik the game will focus more on the recovery of the nation after a blight has crushed its foundations, much like how the Tevinter Emperium is now a shell of its former self, as others have mentioned.



UPDATE TO TOPIC
I apologize for striking up such a nerve with the forumites comparing
both DA and ME. 

I guess Action RPG vs Strategic RPG [thanks, slimgrin] is what I truly meant.  I
guess what I meant to say was that i preferred the strategic-ness of
DA, which Edge of Reality was able to convey on the console versions as
well.  I say this because although I am a fan of strategy rpgs, I am not
a fan of isometric, top-down, rpgs.  If I remember correctly, Kotor was
not Isometric, top-down.  Several ps3 version players have stated on
the ps3 Bioware Social.DA forum, and I agree, the closeness of the
console versions to the characters created a closeness to the characters
themselves for the players. 
So...I hope DA2 does not stray from
the realm of Strategy crpgs, rather than following in the footsteps of
ME 1&2 into the realm of Action crpgs.

Of course, this is
just my opinion,

I hope info on the timeframe of DA2 within the
Dragon Age is mentioned in the GameInformer Mag.


C9136!!  I
agree wholeheartely with you!

Modifié par Tollak_Grippsson, 14 juillet 2010 - 02:14 .

[Narreneth]

For the last time: RPG is not in the combat. It is in the way you (as your character) interact with the game. If the combat does end up being more action-like that does not make this less of an RPG. While it does change the dynamic of combat in the RPG, and while you can dislike it as much as you want (and dislike it validly) you need to quit saying if it does get more action it's not an RPG.

[Merci357]

Uhm, the red parts are marketing catchphrases, and likely meant for the console versions. However, we already know the PC version will feature the same "top down strategical" combat as in Origins. That said, I've no idea since when the combat system has anything at all to do with RPG elements, but maybe you can enlighten me. The Witcher or Jade Empire where no RPGs, then?



Regarding your different tangent, no, the games plays in part parallel to Origins, so not that different in time.

[angj57]

You people are ridiculous. I do share some concerns about DA2, but the constant ME2 bashing basically shows Bioware one thing-- they can make a hugely sucessful, well-liked, and critically acclaimed game and a lot of their most vocal fans will hate it, so they might as well ignore them. There weren't any rpg options in ME1 that were removed in ME2.  There was a different tone, yes, but some fans who didn't want the tone to change have thrown temper tantrums on the forums that were completely unjustified.

The "shooter" aspect of ME2 not only has nothing to do with role playing, it also was present in ME1. Furthermore new aspects of the game, like the ambiguous organization you work for, gave you more opportunities to role play than the straight forward goals and organization in the original.

Modifié par angj57, 14 juillet 2010 - 12:42 .

[Wishpig]

Lol, I always thought the fight like a Spartan line was stupid. I don't see my Hawke running around in a thong stabbing people with a spear. Although hopefully I will get to kick someone into a bottomless pit.

[Narreneth]

Wishpig wrote...

Lol, I always thought the fight like a Spartan line was stupid. I don't see my Hawke running around in a thong stabbing people with a spear. Although hopefully I will get to kick someone into a bottomless pit.

Yeah, I don't think it was meant to be taken quite that literally.

[Stalky24]

let me reprase "Think like a commander and fight like a marine"

makes more sense now?

[Narreneth]

Stalky24 wrote...

let me reprase "Think like a commander and fight like a marine"
makes more sense now?

Idiot.

[Lord_Saulot]

Tollak_Grippsson wrote...

Note: i did a serch first, but no similar discussion topic as I could tell.

As someone on the GameInformer forums stated, "They better not cut out the RPG elements like they did to Mass Effect 2."  This worries me greatly due to the mention of a single protagonist (so far).  Granted, the ME 'franchise' is a Space-based adventure.  Space is not a tratidional (dark) fantasy setting as most rpg 'experts'/players might proclaim.  However, I am one of those people who liked Bioware's original ME rpg-based space setting because it was new to the Space-based game genre as far as I know compared to the "shooter" genre that ME2 seems to fall under. 

Dr. Muzyka states , and I quote, “Dragon Age 2 will simultaneously deliver an epic story and set a new
bar for intense action in the genre.”, as well as saying, "players will be able to 'think like a general and fight like a Spartan,'”  This, unforturnately, sounds as though Bioware is taking a similar approach in DA2 as they did in ME2, and therefore, in my opinion, removing the rpg aspect of the Dragon Age dark fantasy setting,  As Bioware approached Green Ronin to create a dark fantasy pnp rpg based on the DA world, I am hoping that the DA franchise remains true to the "Origin"al presentation of the DA universe. 
You must remember, however, that ME was originally a console game which was later ported to the PC, and most console games are fast-paced compared to the DA crpg where there was much one could do in terms of precisely directing party members' actions, especially through pause-and-play.  And also remember that DA was originally a PC-based game, and then transferred to consoles.  This role reversal may influence whether or not DA2 remains true to its predecessor's traditional PC rpg-based background.  I think that this difference is a crucial difference between the DA franchise and the ME franchise.

On a different tangent, I remember an early slip of info mentioning that DA2 will take place at the end of the Dragon age, around Dragon Age 70 and therefore the original party members will definitely not be participants in DA2.  i  thik the game will focus more on the recovery of the nation after a blight has crushed its foundations, much like how the Tevinter Emperium is now a shell of its former self, as others have mentioned.

I agree with you that DA and ME are different and that they will probably take different tracks.

To comment on the red parts:
1) Intense action - this was heavily played up in the Dragon Age 1 marketing. 
2) Fight like a Spartan - first, this is paired with think like a general, and you cannot look at one half of the parallel in isolation without the other.  Second, the 300 references were there with the first one too - it was mentioned as a combat influence in the collector's edition's bonus dvd. 
So really those phrases just sound like more of the same as in DAO.

Modifié par Lord_Saulot, 14 juillet 2010 - 01:00 .

[WingsandRings]

All I care about with the combat system is that how well my PC fights is based on HER skills, not mine. The flaw for me with ME (never played ME2) is that Shepard was a fragging Space Marine, and yet since I can't aim worth crap she was a terrible shot. From an RPG perspective, that just doesn't make sense.

[angj57]

WingsandRings wrote...

All I care about with the combat system is that how well my PC fights is based on HER skills, not mine. The flaw for me with ME (never played ME2) is that Shepard was a fragging Space Marine, and yet since I can't aim worth crap she was a terrible shot. From an RPG perspective, that just doesn't make sense.

Sad that you never played Mass Effect 2, as that problem is gone. You no longer have to put skill points into a gun to be able to aim it correctly. This is one of the "terrible" changes in the game that people frequently rant about on the forums. As far as your aiming abilities go, there is pretty significant auto-aim, especially on lower difficulties, so I wouldn't think that would be a problem.

Modifié par angj57, 14 juillet 2010 - 01:19 .

[TheTrooper1138]

Stalky24 wrote...

let me reprase "Think like a commander and fight like a marine"
makes more sense now?

Keep your M-16s our of my Dark Fantasy!

And I think the Spartan think is supposed to make you think of 300... which makes me even more doubtful about the game, since that might mean they wanna make it pseudo-cool and in turn make it absolutely superficial...

[WingsandRings]

Well it never auto-aimed enough for me, because I always felt like I practically had to ram my gun down a husk's mouth before the damn thing blew away. And the MAKO was the most useless weapon I've ever encountered. I was 300x more likely to be blown away in the MAKO than to do any damage.



It's why I like the KOTOR/DA (and even JE) way of aiming: you just pick which enemy is "highlighted", basically, tell your character what to do, and they go to town.



The ironic thing is, IRL I am actually a pretty good shot. But using, for all intents and purposes, a joystick, I suuuuuuuuuck. It's the main reason I don't play FPSs.

[Lord_Saulot]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

Stalky24 wrote...

let me reprase "Think like a commander and fight like a marine"
makes more sense now?

Keep your M-16s our of my Dark Fantasy!

And I think the Spartan think is supposed to make you think of 300... which makes me even more doubtful about the game, since that might mean they wanna make it pseudo-cool and in turn make it absolutely superficial...

300 was an influence in the first game's fighting as well.  Watch the "Making of" video in the Collector's Edition, and they mention this clearly, as well as talk about using 300 stunt actors to model the combat.

So why would that influence make it superficial now, when it isn't even a change?

[TheTrooper1138]

Lord_Saulot wrote...

300 was an influence in the first game's fighting as well.  Watch the "Making of" video in the Collector's Edition, and they mention this clearly, as well as talk about using 300 stunt actors to model the combat.

So why would that influence make it superficial now, when it isn't even a change?

I was obviously not referring to the combat part, but if they already market it with 300 references this early on, then I fear they might try to copy it's superficiality, as they try to appease the audience who like the "cool" look and it's superficial dialogue style or whatever...

[C9316]

As one of the console players I am concerned about the removal of the traditional combat system from the 360 and PS3. I must be one of the only console gamers who actually liked the "boring" system; it made me feel like the battle hinged on what I ordered my compainions to do I felt empowered. I also felt it as reminiscent to when I played KOToR on the Xbox long ago which I feel had a similar combat system. I also enjoyed ME1 due to its compelling story and suprising rpg elements in the setting of an Sci-Fi story; and despite the less compelling story in my opinion, and the leaning to a more action game I also enjoyed ME2. But lets be honest DA is a dark fanasty RPG the new system worked in ME2 because of its shooter style and space setting. I considered DA as the game I could go enjoy when I wanted to experience the traditional RPG elements that weren't in ME2. So please if your listening Bioware hear my earnest plea: Don't Mass Effect 2 Dragon Age, let it remain as the RPG fantasy epic I've grown to adore please!!

Modifié par C9316, 14 juillet 2010 - 02:01 .

[Tollak_Grippsson]

I apologize for striking up such a nerve with the forumites comparing both DA and ME. 

I guess Action RPG vs Strategic RPG [thanks, slimgrin] is what I truly meant.  I guess what I meant to say was that i preferred the strategic-ness of DA, which Edge of Reality was able to convey on the console versions as well.  I say this because although I am a fan of strategy rpgs, I am not a fan of isometric, top-down, rpgs.  If I remember correctly, Kotor was not Isometric, top-down.  Several ps3 version players have stated on the ps3 Bioware Social.DA forum, and I agree, the closeness of the console versions to the characters created a closeness to the characters themselves for the players. 
So...I hope DA2 does not stray from the realm of Strategy crpgs, rather than following in the footsteps of ME 1&2 into the realm of Action crpgs.

Of course, this is just my opinion,

I hope info on the timeframe of DA2 within the Dragon Age is mentioned in the GameInformer Mag.


C9136!!  I agree wholeheartely with you!

Modifié par Tollak_Grippsson, 14 juillet 2010 - 02:02 .

[Lord_Saulot]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

Lord_Saulot wrote...

300 was an influence in the first game's fighting as well.  Watch the "Making of" video in the Collector's Edition, and they mention this clearly, as well as talk about using 300 stunt actors to model the combat.

So why would that influence make it superficial now, when it isn't even a change?

I was obviously not referring to the combat part, but if they already market it with 300 references this early on, then I fear they might try to copy it's superficiality, as they try to appease the audience who like the "cool" look and it's superficial dialogue style or whatever...

I just don't see it.  They marketed the first one with an emphasis on action packed combat, bloody visuals, and loud music.  So I guess I never really expected them to stop using that kind of marketing style.

In any case, hopefully they will reveal more information soon and we'll have a better idea of what sort of game this is.

[Altima Darkspells]

angj57 wrote...

You people are ridiculous. I do share some concerns about DA2, but the constant ME2 bashing basically shows Bioware one thing-- they can make a hugely sucessful, well-liked, and critically acclaimed game and a lot of their most vocal fans will hate it, so they might as well ignore them. There weren't any rpg options in ME1 that were removed in ME2.  There was a different tone, yes, but some fans who didn't want the tone to change have thrown temper tantrums on the forums that were completely unjustified.

The "shooter" aspect of ME2 not only has nothing to do with role playing, it also was present in ME1. Furthermore new aspects of the game, like the ambiguous organization you work for, gave you more opportunities to role play than the straight forward goals and organization in the original.

You do realize that Dragon Age--at least, before EA's Manson marketing went into effect--was largely proclaimed to be a game for the traditional RPG-ists, right?  The fact that Dragon Age sold fairly well still indicates that there is still such a market.

Many of BioWare's older fans do not like Mass Effect.  It's not a bashing on the game--besides expressing what they disliked about it--it's simple preference.  Someone can simply say that they do not like shooters, which means they will not like Mass Effect through no fault of the game's own.  Another can say that they loathed the way Shepard was voiced.  Once again, this is preference.

The frustration comes from the fact that Dragon Age was a wonderfully traditional game with tons of content and quite a bit of replayability, and now they're changing it.  It's like the fans are being punished because they had the gall to like Dragon Age in the first place.

Most of all, there's already a Mass Effect.  There is simply no need for Dragon Age to go in that direction.  Which I'm not saying it is or it isn't.  Though it certainly looks that way.

Many people simply assumed that BioWare would take what they already had and improve upon it. DA2 is already a drastic departure from what Origins is, so of course it's going to rile up a fair amount of fans.

[Onyx Jaguar]

And I'm pretty sure many of Bioware's original fans hate all of their games because they don't have mechs in them

[wwwwowwww]

People argue/debate about the dumbest stuff sometimes

[In Exile]

Altima Darkspells wrote...

Most of all, there's already a Mass Effect.  There is simply no need for Dragon Age to go in that direction.  Which I'm not saying it is or it isn't.  Though it certainly looks that way.

Many people simply assumed that BioWare would take what they already had and improve upon it. DA2 is already a drastic departure from what Origins is, so of course it's going to rile up a fair amount of fans.

Most of all, there's already a Baldur's Gate/Baldur's Gate 2.  There is simply no need for Dragon Age 2 to go in that direction.  Which I'm not saying it is or it isn't. 

Not everyone likes the same features, or even thinks the same features are the critical features in an RPG. As of right now, isometric combat is in for the PC and allegedly unchanged. Until this particular detail changes, arguing that DA2 is going in the direction of an action RPG, which is the main claim of this thread, is unwarranted.

While we could have yet another debate on VO, there are plenty on this board already; still, the issue stands. It is not clear that DA2 will be less of an RPG gameplay wise, as of right now.

Modifié par In Exile, 14 juillet 2010 - 03:15 .

[Felfenix]

http://social.biowar...ex/3064634&lf=8



PC combat and controls basically unchanged. Console controls just improved. Overall, apparently combat is the same, they claim. So much for hysteria and drama. Back to your pathetically boring life, unless you can think up a new cause and purpose.