535 réponses à ce sujet

[Chairon de Celeste]

And yet it has been confirmed that the 3 choices were only a part of the single
options choice in that demo and that there will be certainly opting situations
with more than 3 options to choose from.

Getting feelings towards reviewers lately...

Modifié par Chairon de Celeste, 24 juillet 2010 - 08:23 .

[Altima Darkspells]

Grommash94 wrote...


But we don't know what the budget is like (it probably is larger than DA:O), how much they have saved because of dropping the Origins. They have not created an entirely new combat system; from the IGN article, it seems not much has changed in terms of UI on the console version, and they have stated that the PC version will largely remain the same.

I don't think VO is really that much of a limiter. SW:TOR is going to have multiple voice actors, and have more than 100 hours of gameplay for each class (in terms of story and quests alone). Obviously the budget is a lot higher, but still.

Plus, as has been said elsewhere, it could be that they are going to simply remove the pointless conversations one can have with guards and stuff in order to maintain the budget.

With that said, yes the game will most likely be shorter than Origins. I don't think it'll be so short, however, that it will be like ME2

DA2 almost certainly has a greater budget, since for years the game did not have a publisher, meaning BioWare had to work with whatever in-studio resources it could spare (which, at the time, was not a lot).  However, BioWare is now owned by EA, and EA has a certain...history of producing crappified sequels (and Awakening wasn't exactly the best BioWare could do--considering its price tag).

Also, the IGN article is crap, and it's obvious that the writers had absolutely no interest in DA2 or DAO.  They clearly had no idea what they were doing, and I would be surprised if they even *played* Origins.  So their combat on whether or not combat has remained largely the same is most likely flawed.  'Oh, look, they're still using swords and magic meters and hitpoints!  Yup, most definitely still mostly the same.'

Originally, TOR was not going to have full VO.  Why?  Because the cost was extremely high.  They would have to hire something like 16 professional VAs, keep them around for any future expansions (and there will be expansions).  And, of course, TOR has the backing of some of the largest entertainment companies ever--EA and Lucasarts.  They want TOR to succeed because they see with WoW how much they can milk the hell out of the MMO genre.

Lastly, those 'pointless' conversations are what makes games great.  Sure, a solid game has excellent gameplay, a cohesive story, and all that, but truly great games, well, you can tell when they go the extra mile to make it good.  That's why Valve is so popular.  That's why Blizzard--despite being greedy, fan-abusive jerkholes--is so popular.  Heck, that's why Obsidian, who has been crapped on over and over, has a loyal following.

[Zhijn]

David Gaider wrote...

Lyssistr wrote...
Noone's saying it will be bad, the question is not bad or good. Here, the question is if it's hack & slash or not. It's something that needs to be clarified, else it may simply not being honestly advertised.

I'm not certain about the "hack & slash" term, myself. That's one of those loaded terms that tends to apply to games that are light on story and heavy on action-based twitch mechanics, after all, and tends to mean different things to different people.

The action is quicker in DA2 and the controls are designed to be more responsive-- you input a command and something happens immediately. Which is not to say that you're furiously pounding the action button to cue every swing, but simply that the delays caused by animation sequences and "getting into position" are less than they were in DAO. Is that "hack & slash"? You tell me. In some respects you could extend that same appellation to DAO.

In my personel opinion there two types of hack & slash.

One being the Diablo/Witcher style where the mouse clicking do all the hacking & slashing. And the second being your usual third person action combo stuff (example-god of war, fable blabla) where you chain key strokes (PC) to hit a mob or buttons on a controller (consoles) for combo effects, which usually end with the player just button smashing to hack & slash thrue a horde of mobs.

Thats just my view on what Hack & Slash is about, im sure others have another opinion on what it might be.

Either way, are DA2 close to either of thouse two options i mention?. =)

[Grommash94]

Altima Darkspells wrote...

Grommash94 wrote...


But we don't know what the budget is like (it probably is larger than DA:O), how much they have saved because of dropping the Origins. They have not created an entirely new combat system; from the IGN article, it seems not much has changed in terms of UI on the console version, and they have stated that the PC version will largely remain the same.

I don't think VO is really that much of a limiter. SW:TOR is going to have multiple voice actors, and have more than 100 hours of gameplay for each class (in terms of story and quests alone). Obviously the budget is a lot higher, but still.

Plus, as has been said elsewhere, it could be that they are going to simply remove the pointless conversations one can have with guards and stuff in order to maintain the budget.

With that said, yes the game will most likely be shorter than Origins. I don't think it'll be so short, however, that it will be like ME2

DA2 almost certainly has a greater budget, since for years the game did not have a publisher, meaning BioWare had to work with whatever in-studio resources it could spare (which, at the time, was not a lot).  However, BioWare is now owned by EA, and EA has a certain...history of producing crappified sequels (and Awakening wasn't exactly the best BioWare could do--considering its price tag).

Also, the IGN article is crap, and it's obvious that the writers had absolutely no interest in DA2 or DAO.  They clearly had no idea what they were doing, and I would be surprised if they even *played* Origins.  So their combat on whether or not combat has remained largely the same is most likely flawed.  'Oh, look, they're still using swords and magic meters and hitpoints!  Yup, most definitely still mostly the same.'

Originally, TOR was not going to have full VO.  Why?  Because the cost was extremely high.  They would have to hire something like 16 professional VAs, keep them around for any future expansions (and there will be expansions).  And, of course, TOR has the backing of some of the largest entertainment companies ever--EA and Lucasarts.  They want TOR to succeed because they see with WoW how much they can milk the hell out of the MMO genre.

Lastly, those 'pointless' conversations are what makes games great.  Sure, a solid game has excellent gameplay, a cohesive story, and all that, but truly great games, well, you can tell when they go the extra mile to make it good.  That's why Valve is so popular.  That's why Blizzard--despite being greedy, fan-abusive jerkholes--is so popular.  Heck, that's why Obsidian, who has been crapped on over and over, has a loyal following.

No, but the IGN article specifically stated that on the 360 version it was the same exact system in terms of choosing skills:


"Different attacks are mapped to the X, Y, and B buttons of your
controller (we were playing on an Xbox 360). Hawk, the hero of the
game, had a typical sword swipe mapped to X, a thrust mapped to Y, and a
twirl that would take down all the enemies around him mapped to B. By
holding the right trigger you can access a second set of attacks, so it
seems you'll have six moves available to you at a time. Each move has a
recharge time, so you can't just keep mashing the X button to chop
through enemies.
"



The small conversations are great, yes. But if it comes between having the game *insert number here* hours longer with meaningful content as opposed to those conversations, well...the choice ic clear to me.

Modifié par Grommash94, 24 juillet 2010 - 08:28 .

[Kenrae]

AntiChri5 wrote...
We will have to trust in the writing on whether or not the paraphrase accurately portrays the voiced lines. One thing we do know is that we have something that was not present in either DA: O or ME/ME 2. The indicators of intent. Now i know whether or not i am joking around with a character or outright insulting them.

That sounds like Alpha Protocol system, and I loved it. It's the best conversation system I've ever seen.

[derkaderka-]

AntiChri5 wrote...

derkaderka- wrote...

Saibh wrote...


EDIT: Also. Someone explain to me how the dialogue wheel presents a "dumbed down" version of anything. So long as the icons and the shortline do their jobs, I hardly see how we have anything to worry about. Seriously, it's just a cleaner version of presenting everything in a choice 1, 2, 3 format.

in dao you get to read all the choices out. in mass effect wheel you don't. knowing up front which dialogue doesn't fit with your role playing is crucial. not knowing breaks it. with the wheel, even the one you do choose you have no idea what YOU are about to say. it breaks the immersion of being in control of your character. the mass effect wheel makes you a spectator in shepard's story. spectator = bad. in dragon age, you get to choose the response that fits your personality and stay connected with your character by choosing what you say. in mass effect, you have no personality, you have to choose from a couple of shepard's. its very lame. there's nothing rpg about it.

We will have to trust in the writing on whether or not the paraphrase accurately portrays the voiced lines. One thing we do know is that we have something that was not present in either DA: O or ME/ME 2. The indicators of intent. Now i know whether or not i am joking around with a character or outright insulting them.

FYI: The oh so perfect list in Origins had a maximum of six options and no more than (i believe) 65 characters.

its the difference bewtween an rpg and an adventure book. me2 is an adventure book. the dialogue wheel is the lazy way of telling the story the developers want at the expense of letting the player choose who the pc is at all times.

but the dao chat wasn't broke, so don't fix it. reading the options out completely before choosing lets you see the possible scenarios to come for each choice path. you get to choose which path best fits your personality, goals, values, etc.

the dialogue wheel doesn't give you any idea of that. the wheel cannot give you an idea of what is going to be said in length. you're completely powerless, and you will be sitting on the sidelines not knowing what's going to take place in every conversation. 

with sheperd in me2, we are just along for the ride. that is becoming the audience to a story. that is not role play. the story was decent and the action was good, but the rpg elements were all wrong. if they ruin da2 by going down this path and throw away those old true rpg roots that they built dao on, then this is just gonna be another adventure book, and not an rpg. 

spectate = bad

[Grommash94]

derkaderka- wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

derkaderka- wrote...

Saibh wrote...


EDIT: Also. Someone explain to me how the dialogue wheel presents a "dumbed down" version of anything. So long as the icons and the shortline do their jobs, I hardly see how we have anything to worry about. Seriously, it's just a cleaner version of presenting everything in a choice 1, 2, 3 format.

in dao you get to read all the choices out. in mass effect wheel you don't. knowing up front which dialogue doesn't fit with your role playing is crucial. not knowing breaks it. with the wheel, even the one you do choose you have no idea what YOU are about to say. it breaks the immersion of being in control of your character. the mass effect wheel makes you a spectator in shepard's story. spectator = bad. in dragon age, you get to choose the response that fits your personality and stay connected with your character by choosing what you say. in mass effect, you have no personality, you have to choose from a couple of shepard's. its very lame. there's nothing rpg about it.

We will have to trust in the writing on whether or not the paraphrase accurately portrays the voiced lines. One thing we do know is that we have something that was not present in either DA: O or ME/ME 2. The indicators of intent. Now i know whether or not i am joking around with a character or outright insulting them.

FYI: The oh so perfect list in Origins had a maximum of six options and no more than (i believe) 65 characters.

its the difference bewtween an rpg and an adventure book. me2 is an adventure book. the dialogue wheel is the lazy way of telling the story the developers want at the expense of letting the player choose who the pc is at all times.

but the dao chat wasn't broke, so don't fix it. reading the options out completely before choosing lets you see the possible scenarios to come for each choice path. you get to choose which path best fits your personality, goals, values, etc.

the dialogue wheel doesn't give you any idea of that. the wheel cannot give you an idea of what is going to be said in length. you're completely powerless, and you will be sitting on the sidelines not knowing what's going to take place in every conversation. 

with sheperd in me2, we are just along for the ride. that is becoming the audience to a story. that is not role play. the story was decent and the action was good, but the rpg elements were all wrong. if they ruin da2 by going down this path and throw away those old true rpg roots that they built dao on, then this is just gonna be another adventure book, and not an rpg. 

spectate = bad

Not unless the paraphrasing is done well, and ofc the icons in the DA dialogue wheel will help too.

[AntiChri5]

derkaderka- wrote...

its the difference bewtween an rpg and an adventure book. me2 is an adventure book. the dialogue wheel is the lazy way of telling the story the developers want at the expense of letting the player choose who the pc is at all times.

No, it isnt. The dialouge wheel was a way to:

1. Organize choices. So that it would be clear which options would be simple questions and which would advance the conversation.

2. Prevent boredom instilled by having to read a line then hear the exact same thing spoken aloud.

3. Guarantee some sort of consistency with the placement of Paragon and Renegade options

derkaderka- wrote...

but the dao chat wasn't broke, so don't fix it. reading the options out completely before choosing lets you see the possible scenarios to come for each choice path. you get to choose which path best fits your personality, goals, values, etc.

Yes, it was. There was no way to know whether a line was a simple question or would progress the conversation. There was no way to discern tone. I still dont know which of the "har har you is old" lines you can say to Wynne are good natured, friendly jibes and which are open insults. ME's system inadvertently helped solve this (the Paragon line right after recruiting Archangel in ME 2, and the DA 2 system will openly confront it with a small indicator in the centre of the wheel to indicate the general tone of what you are saying. Whether or not the paraphrase is successful in conveying what Hawke will say is currently an unknown and rests on Biowares capable writers.

derkaderka- wrote...

the dialogue wheel doesn't give you any idea of that. the wheel cannot give you an idea of what is going to be said in length. you're completely powerless, and you will be sitting on the sidelines not knowing what's going to take place in every conversation. 

Again....depends on the implementation in DA 2. Personally i never had problems with ME system.

derkaderka- wrote...

with sheperd in me2, we are just along for the ride. that is becoming the audience to a story. that is not role play. the story was decent and the action was good, but the rpg elements were all wrong. if they ruin da2 by going down this path and throw away those old true rpg roots that they built dao on, then this is just gonna be another adventure book, and not an rpg. 

spectate = bad

Maybe for you, not for me. In any case, this is a different writing team that has already shown they are making changes to the system.

[Kenrae]

I don't feel an spectator while playing ME or ME2. At least no more than playing DA:O.

[Vicious]

The 360 version is intentionally made Ninja Gaiden/God Of War-ish, because it just fits the console more.



The PC version is more in-line with DA:Oish.



Personally I think it makes a hell of a lot of sense that way.

[Guriko]

Is it seriously gonna be a hack and slash?

[dragon_83]

AntiChri5

derkaderka- wrote...

but the dao chat wasn't broke, so don't fix it. reading the options out completely before choosing lets you see the possible scenarios to come for each choice path. you get to choose which path best fits your personality, goals, values, etc.

Yes, it was. There was no way to know whether a line was a simple question or would progress the conversation. There was no way to discern tone. I still dont know which of the "har har you is old" lines you can say to Wynne are good natured, friendly jibes and which are open insults.

DAO's conversation system was not broken. But the system of ME is a dumbed down system. You see what is paragon, what is renegade and what is natural. It is black and white. In DAO, there are answers which are not black and white, so you, the player had to interpret it. You had to think about it. This just shows that DAO was a more complex RPG, than ME. But good for you, the second one won't be.

Modifié par dragon_83, 24 juillet 2010 - 09:11 .

[AntiChri5]

Guriko wrote...

Is it seriously gonna be a hack and slash?

Try reading the thread before posting.

You learn more by listening and forming your own opinion than asking for someone else's.

[AntiChri5]

dragon_83 wrote...

AntiChri5

derkaderka- wrote...

but the dao chat wasn't broke, so don't fix it. reading the options out completely before choosing lets you see the possible scenarios to come for each choice path. you get to choose which path best fits your personality, goals, values, etc.

Yes, it was. There was no way to know whether a line was a simple question or would progress the conversation. There was no way to discern tone. I still dont know which of the "har har you is old" lines you can say to Wynne are good natured, friendly jibes and which are open insults.

DAO's conversation system was not broke. But the system of ME is a dumbed down system. You see what is paragon, what is renegade and what is natural. It is black and white. In DAO, there are answers which are not black and white, so you, the player had to interpret it. You had to think about it. This just shows that DAO was a more complex RPG, than ME. But good for you, the second one won't be.

DA: O conversation system was flawed, deeply so, for the reasons i listed.

We know that DA 2 has no morality system, so there is still just as much left open to interpretation.

[dragon_83]

AntiChri5 wrote...


DA: O conversation system was flawed, deeply so, for the reasons i listed.

Maybe for you. I never had any problems with it.

[AntiChri5]

Kordaris wrote...

dragon_83 wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...


DA: O conversation system was flawed, deeply so, for the reasons i listed.

Maybe for you. I never had any problems with it.

Besides romance neither did I.

And i never had problems with Mass Effects.

That does not mean that both systems are not flawed.

They both have advantages and disadvantages.

I see the simple list as a somewhat antiquated method which is holding us back as much as anything.

[Aratham Darksight]

dragon_83 wrote...

DAO's conversation system was not broken. But the system of ME is a dumbed down system. You see what is paragon, what is renegade and what is natural. It is black and white. In DAO, there are answers which are not black and white, so you, the player had to interpret it. You had to think about it. This just shows that DAO was a more complex RPG, than ME. But good for you, the second one won't be.

But DA2 still won't have any alignment. The choices still won't be black and white. It's not like the tone of a dialogue choice corresponds to good or evil. Delivering an angry-toned response to a thief or to a display of injustice are very different morally.

[dragon_83]

AntiChri5 wrote...



I see the simple list as a somewhat antiquated method which is holding us back as much as anything.

I still can't see why is the list method holding us back. It shows your character's exact answer, and not just a hint about what the character is about to say. Is it really that boring or hard to read 5 sentences? If we are heading in this direction, the next conversation system won't feature words at all. Just 3 icons. One for the good answer, one for the evil and one for the natural.

[derkaderka-]

AntiChri5 wrote...

dragon_83 wrote...

AntiChri5

derkaderka- wrote...

but the dao chat wasn't broke, so don't fix it. reading the options out completely before choosing lets you see the possible scenarios to come for each choice path. you get to choose which path best fits your personality, goals, values, etc.

Yes, it was. There was no way to know whether a line was a simple question or would progress the conversation. There was no way to discern tone. I still dont know which of the "har har you is old" lines you can say to Wynne are good natured, friendly jibes and which are open insults.

DAO's conversation system was not broke. But the system of ME is a dumbed down system. You see what is paragon, what is renegade and what is natural. It is black and white. In DAO, there are answers which are not black and white, so you, the player had to interpret it. You had to think about it. This just shows that DAO was a more complex RPG, than ME. But good for you, the second one won't be.

DA: O conversation system was flawed, deeply so, for the reasons i listed.

We know that DA 2 has no morality system, so there is still just as much left open to interpretation.

dragon 83 is right on. the simplicity of mass effect good/bad is so unimaginitive. 1-5 words do not give you a clue what the next conversation will be. in mass effect you know which response will net you an xp gain in either paragon/renegade. there's nothing interesting about chat when you're just chasing xp for your lame meter.

even if da2 doesn't use the stupid xp meter, the wheel is fundamentally flawed still. in mass effect you could pick a chat option, hoping you knew what shepard would say, but then shepard will go nuts on you and say a bunch of extra stuff that wasn't even mentioned in your choice. full chat in text is the way to go.

even if the new wheel gives you an idea of your tone, that doesn't tell you where that tone is directed, with what morales, values, etc. full chat will tell you what you need to know before making that choice.

*******
as for your problems not figuring out how people would react to your choices in dao, that is a result of you not paying attention to detail (a crucial part of an rpg). there are indications in the game that let you know each companion has its own personality, and it is your job to figure out how to communicate with their good side. if all else fail, use the wiki. dao chat is not flawed. do your homework and you won't upset the npc's with the wrong attitude. if you know the npc, and you can comprehend dialogue then you should get an idea how the npc is going to react.

the problem with the mass effect wheel is that you can't even tell how your own character is going to react. fundamental flaw for an rpg game.

[AntiChri5]

dragon_83 wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...



I see the simple list as a somewhat antiquated method which is holding us back as much as anything.

I still can't see why is the list method holding us back. It shows your character's exact answer, and not just a hint about what the character is about to say. Is it really that boring or hard to read 5 sentences? If we are heading in this direction, the next conversation system won't feature words at all. Just 3 icons. One for the good answer, one for the evil and one for the natural.

Because it was dis......

Hang on.... i have said this all before, havent i?

Look up. My reasons are all there.

Besides which, THERE IS NO MORALITY SYSTEM IN DA 2.

Please, memorise that part.

Don't try to insult me, it is only going to get the thread locked.

[dragon_83]

AntiChri5 wrote...

dragon_83 wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...



I see the simple list as a somewhat antiquated method which is holding us back as much as anything.

I still can't see why is the list method holding us back. It shows your character's exact answer, and not just a hint about what the character is about to say. Is it really that boring or hard to read 5 sentences? If we are heading in this direction, the next conversation system won't feature words at all. Just 3 icons. One for the good answer, one for the evil and one for the natural.

Because it was dis......

Hang on.... i have said this all before, havent i?

Look up. My reasons are all there.

Besides which, THERE IS NO MORALITY SYSTEM IN DA 2.

Please, memorise that part.

Don't try to insult me, it is only going to get the thread locked.

Ok, there won't be a morality system. I'm sorry, let me edit my answer:
If we are heading in this direction, the next conversation system won't
feature words at all. Just 3 icons. One for the agressive answer, one for
the joking and one for the romantic. Happy?