135 réponses à ce sujet

[Collider]

TheSeeker2654 wrote...

Collider wrote...

TheSeeker2654 wrote... You guys do realize that the biggest number of gamers, as well as those that are most able to spend alot of money on games are 30+? I mean, you teeny bopper, skinny jeans wearing, emo hair having pansies are a small subsection of the gaming community. Yet like all CHILDREN, you think the world and in this instance the gaming world, revolves around you.

I did not ask your opinion, geezer. Please take your archaic, outrageously unhip "traditions" back to the mossy and spider filled place it came.

And in the end your true nature reveals itself. Completely unaffectual, unintelligent, and unhindered by original thought. Oh, and actually, you DID open yourself up to my opinion when you created this thread. Or did you think that you would state your completely unthoughtful, uninsightful, unimaginative, and thoroughly idiotic insights and think that everyone would be just so taken aback by your comments that we would all bow at your feet and worship your "worldly knowledge"
Please, all knowing child, command me for you know all in this world. lol, wow, I cant believe I was ever as clueless as you.

I grow tired of your inane ranting about the "good old days." They are clearly gone and a new generation has risen to claim power and climb over the bodies of the old. Please bore someone else to death, and most preferably someone as ancient as you and the ideas you parade. Though, I realize that my words may fall upon very literally deaf ears.

[TheSeeker2654]

imported_beer wrote...

BlackyBlack wrote...

@imported_beer

I disagree. Everything should evolve. How else are we going to appreciate the good old days ?

I think you misunderstood me, Blacky. Please let me explain:

I was saying that what we like may not always be in a commercial entity's best interest. I was a child of the BG1 era. I played ULTIMA for crying out loud! 

Firstly:
I am not as quick to assume that the game will be soul-less, dry, appealing only to 14 year olds who are mentally 8, because of the announced changes because I enjoy the way the writers write and *cannot* reasonably believe that no matter how much voice acting or dynamic combat is involved, the writing, story or companions will suck. Some people seem so quick to jump to that conclusion. I cannot.

Secondly:
Case in point: One day Bioware fans were RANTING and raving about a *stupid* DAO trailer with a Marilyn Manson soundtrack. They told them they had destroyed RPGs, they sold out, they sucked. These fans were too selfish to even realize that there were large scale layoffs. In Bioware and in other EA held companies. They were too busy RANTING about Marilyn Manson and how DAO was now totally hack and slash, when the reality is that the people who make it have to work for a living. 

That is why I have little sympathy for the holier than thou who simply crib and whine about commercialization. It is easy to do that. As someone who still co-ops BG2, the easiest thing for me to do is bemoan the end of the era I most loved. I can either see what this new era is, and if I can evolve with it, or I can bow out gracefully from the genre. But I cannot blame Bioware for making a living.

Evolution is different then homogenization/streamlining. When you evolve you take the core of the genre and then try and bring that into this newest batch of consoles and gamers of today.. But I feel like they are trying to not evolve so much as blend genres. This is not a bad thing. Some of the best games are a cool mix of many genres. But the issue (for me) comes when you blend an RPG with another genre and the RPG parts are buried in the other genre elements, if that makes any sense. At that point you no longer really have an rpg do you?

I think the biggest issue with evolving the RPG genre is that the "core" of what makes a great RPG is different from one gamer to the next. And all are equally valid. What I bemoan is the death of the kind of RPG that I like. Im sorry, but how is liking tactical combat and high character customization archaic and old? These things can easily be brought into a new game and achieve high commerical success. I would have thought DA:O would have proved that.

I grow tired of your inane ranting about the "good old days." They are clearly gone and a new generation has risen to claim power and climb over the bodies of the old. Please bore someone else to death, and most preferably someone as ancient as you and the ideas you parade. Though, I realize that my words may fall upon very literally deaf ears.

You know whats funny? I havent said a damn thing about the good ole days. Thats all you. Obviously what I find fun and engaging isnt the "good ole days' or the first dragon age wouldnt have sold nearly as well as it did. I agree with many of the things that they are doing to the second one actually. It sounds like they are changing what needs to be changed and leaving the tactical combat and customization largely intact.

I just didnt like the OP at all. Sounds like a douchbag.

Modifié par TheSeeker2654, 26 juillet 2010 - 03:57 .

[IoCaster]

BlackyBlack wrote...

Wall of text warning

It may come as a surprise to some of you, but BioWare doesn't exist to fulfill a small vocal minority's wishes. It's a company who's main purpose is to make money and to do that they need to appease the majority of gamers, not the RPG elitists (also known as the biggest whiners in the world)

Tell it to the creepy Tali fetishists. If they were focused on the majority of gamers they'd be developing yearly CoD clones. BioWare are wholly owned by EA and nobody on this forum has any idea how much autonomy they have. Whining about other people whining is a self-serving bit of trollish whining and pretty dumb.

BlackyBlack wrote...
Someone said in a article: "if the combat ain't broke don't fix it". Well, a lot of console players thought it WAS broke. And guess what: THEY CHANGED THE CONSOLE COMBAT, NOT THE PC COMBAT.

Have you played the final version of Dragon Age 2? If you haven't then you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You can assume whatever you want, but that doesn't mean jack if you haven't played the game. Who the hell are you to tell anyone what has or hasn't changed?

BlackyBlack wrote...
Before release a lot of people complained why the PC isn't voiced. I don't really care whether you prefer ME or DAO (or which story), but you've got to admit the presentation is much better in ME because it's more cinematic. Avatar isn't the best selling movie ever 'cos of its story, it's the presentation that matters. And ME2 sold more than DAO (if my info is wrong and DAO sold more it's probably because it was released on three different systems)

Some people want to just play a game and cinematic presentation isn't of any particular importance to them. Where did you get the idea that your preferences are relevant to anyone else?

VGChartz methodology has always been suspect. I prefer to rely on actual numbers from a reliable source.  Dragon Age: Origins has shipped 3.2 million copies worldwide and Mass Effect 2 has sold through more than 1.6 million units of 2 million shipped. It doesn't matter how many systems each game was released on because it's a bunch of meaningless twaddle. There's a core audience for Dragon Age that isn't interested in Mass Effect.

BlackyBlack wrote...
People need to remember that RPG doesn't mean "isometric game with no voice acting and floating stats". There's all kinds of different genres of RPG (turn based RPGs like Fallout, Action RPGs like Mass Effect, JRPGs like FF etc.). So while its currently unknown in which genre the console version lies, EVERY INFO ON THE PC VERSION WE'VE GOTTEN SUGGESTS THE PC VERSION IS MOSTLY UNCHANGED

What are you doing posting a thread trying to convince people about something you know nothing about? Seriously, you haven't played the game and you don't know what changes have been implemented on the PC version. The game still has months of development left and nothing is final yet.

BlackyBlack wrote...
Complete character customization has NEVER been what defines an RPG. Planescape: Torment, The Witcher, JRPGs none of those have character customization. Of course, I understand what everybody's problem is with it, it's because Origins had it. It's a marketing mistake they named it DA2 (read the last paragraph of this post)

Now you're going to dictate to us what does or doesn't define an RPG? Don't you think that's a bit presumptuous?

BlackyBlack wrote...
A lot of suggestings have been said in this forums like making multiple voice actiors for the protagonist, but do any of you have any idea how much that costs? People really need to start seeing things from the devs eyes. Game making is a very expensive and long process. GTA4 had a budget of $100M.

Do you have any idea how much it costs to develop a game like Dragon Age 2? Do you have any idea what the budget is for the game? You don't know jack do you? Yet you're telling people to "start seeing things" that you're making up?

BlackyBlack wrote...
Anyway, back to my point in the topic. If you had a choice whether to make a lot of money or huge sh!tload of money, would YOU really choose otherwise? I may be wrong, but I think that PEOPLE LIKE MONEY

What assurance do you have that any changes BioWare make DA:O-->DA2 will guarantee them a "sh!tload" of money?

BlackyBlack wrote...
Of course, nothing ANYONE is going to say is going to change the haters' minds. Haters still gonna hate even though they know almost nothing about the game

Ah yes, the 'haters'. Of course anyone with legitimate concerns or doubts have to be labeled appropriately. Haters and whiners can be shouted down, brushed aside and ridiculed because their viewpoint has no legitimacy. Kind of like labeling someone racist, xenophobe, homophobe or sexist to shut them up. Yeah, no.

BlackyBlack wrote...
And one last thing, the game is called DRAGON AGE, not "Mute Gay Warden's story". Although there is problem with naming it DA2 as another forumite pointed out to me. They should have just named it Dragon Age: _____ and sold it off as a another game set in the DA universe, not a sequel. It's a huge marketing mistake

It hasn't been determined to be a "huge marketing mistake" yet. Nothing has been determined and spouting a bunch of nonsense and assurances about sh!t you know nothing about isn't of any particular value to anyone but yourself. It was entertaining though and for that you have my thanks.

[FieryDove]

BlackyBlack wrote...

Wall of text warning

It may come as a surprise to some of you, but BioWare doesn't exist to fulfill a small vocal minority's wishes. It's a company who's main purpose is to make money and to do that they need to appease the majority of gamers, not the RPG elitists (also known as the biggest whiners in the world)

Maybe not start your post in such a hostile manner and you'll get more discussion...just a suggestion.

[In Exile]

Valmy wrote...
There is nothing really to counter arguements that go to the 'OMG BIOWARE IS TEH EVIL' stuff.  Yes all Mass Effect was was pretentious conversations with boobs and sex scenes.  That was the entire game.  Riiiiiight.

Of course Mass Effect was, in stark contrast to DA:O. I mean, in ME you had cleavage shots and tight fitting clothes, whereas in DA:O you had a femminist idol like Morrigan, who was dressed in a way that did not draw attention to her sex appeal at all. In particular, the tasteful romance scenes from ME was replaced with  'teh hot sex' on an engine room floor, say, instead of grinding in underwear and the creepy organsm face from DA:O, which is way more tasteful.

[Addai]

ROD525 wrote...

BlackyBlack wrote...

TheSeeker2654 wrote...

You guys do realize that the biggest number of gamers, as well as those that are most able to spend alot of money on games are 30+?

That's actually pretty sad ...

Please elaborate...why is that sad?

Probably because the poster thinks we should be mowing the lawn, doing Pilates or contributing to humanity rather than sitting at a screen for hours manipulating little blobs of pixels.  Why a teenager couldn't be doing the same things, that's what I'd ask.

[tez19]

blackyblack just got OWNED.

now blackyblack crawl away embarrased and hurt by the ownage and die, silently so you do not disturb anyone else.

[AlanC9]

Amentep wrote...
My point is I've seen one group demanding "the world revolve around them" in these forum and its the one that keeps posting about Baldur's Gate and Plansecape: Torment and how DA should be taking their cues from those games.  And those aren't the younger players.  

The hilarious thing is that Bio did take a cue from Planescape: Torment, which has the most pre-defined PC I've ever seen in an RPG. (Tied with Geralt, I suppose.) Much more defined than Hawke.

[AlanC9]

IoCaster wrote...
It doesn't matter how many systems each game was released on because it's a bunch of meaningless twaddle. 

You mean PS3 owners can play XBox  games too? Wow... I never knew that.

Who says these boards are full of people spouting pretentious nonsense?

Modifié par AlanC9, 26 juillet 2010 - 04:02 .

[Collider]

Hopefully, the alleged pre-defined characteristic of Hawke will not exclude the ability to make the PC an interesting character. They largely failed to do so in Mass Effect, though I understand the difficulty.

[In Exile]

TheSeeker2654 wrote...

Actually the other way around. They are the ones that are demanding that the games be watered down so that they dont have to sit in the menu or do anything except go from one plot point to the next mindlessly, until the credits roll.

Yeah, that's totally what we do! It's because we're really, really stupid, and cannot handle complexity at all like you can. In no way could it be that we just have differences preferences, and things like taste in video-games have no bearing on intelligence or ability.

It's good that you reminded me I was stupid.

[AlanC9]

Maybe we shouldn't be discussing combat here, since that's different depending on platform.

Modifié par AlanC9, 26 juillet 2010 - 04:05 .

[WilliamShatner]

Valmy wrote...

BlackyBlack wrote...
Game making is a very expensive and long process. GTA4 had a budget of $100M.

This is the key to me.  Today's games, if they are going to be up to current technology, are ridiculously expensive.  If Bioware wants to avoid sinking into indy niche status they have to make games that are going to get more than $100M in sales in order to simply recoup the budget.

That requires them to be more appealing to the mainstream.  So far they have managed to do that while still making incredible games, IMO anyway, and hopefully they will continue to do so.  Awakenings aside...

GTA IV is an exception.  It is the most expensive game ever made. Only ten games have cost more than $40 million.

Most triple AAA games cost around $20-30 million, which is not a lot.

[Amentep]

AlanC9 wrote...

Amentep wrote...
My point is I've seen one group demanding "the world revolve around them" in these forum and its the one that keeps posting about Baldur's Gate and Plansecape: Torment and how DA should be taking their cues from those games.  And those aren't the younger players.  

The hilarious thing is that Bio did take a cue from Planescape: Torment, which has the most pre-defined PC I've ever seen in an RPG. (Tied with Geralt, I suppose.) Much more defined than Hawke.

Dunno how defined Hawke will be, but certainly the Gender and much of the past for TNO is set in stone - although the current one is pretty open for the player to develop as they wish.

But yeah I thought that was amusing as well.

[DanaScu]

tez19 wrote...

bobad you not gona reply?
'ignoramous'
LOL
you are a funny one bobad with silly made up words to throw about.

tez19 wrote...

please bobad reply and tell me i am wrong and 'ignoramous' is a word, it will give me a good chuckle.

Well, not spelled exactly correctly, but a word.

http://www.merriam-w...onary/ignoramus

Dictionary. Wonderful resource.

[tez19]

yes i know he told me i spelt ignoramus wrong. keep up mate.

[AlanC9]

Amentep wrote...
Dunno how defined Hawke will be, but certainly the Gender and much of the past for TNO is set in stone - although the current one is pretty open for the player to develop as they wish.

Not to mention the really big one --- appearance. Not only didn't you have any control over TNO's appearance, but he was hideous. Though since the ladies seem to dig him anyway, I guess that's not such a bad thing. 

[TheSeeker2654]

In Exile wrote...

TheSeeker2654 wrote...

Actually the other way around. They are the ones that are demanding that the games be watered down so that they dont have to sit in the menu or do anything except go from one plot point to the next mindlessly, until the credits roll.

Yeah, that's totally what we do! It's because we're really, really stupid, and cannot handle complexity at all like you can. In no way could it be that we just have differences preferences, and things like taste in video-games have no bearing on intelligence or ability.

It's good that you reminded me I was stupid.

NP, I do what I can, lol. Well, what other assumptions can I make? Thats the way the gaming industry is going, and since I was so lovingly told that the young are now stepping over the bodies of us "geezers' to take power and all that, then I can only assume its the younger generation that is either doing the changing or is the impetus behind the change. 

AlanC9 wrote...

Amentep wrote...
Dunno how defined Hawke will be, but certainly the Gender and much of the past for TNO is set in stone - although the current one is pretty open for the player to develop as they wish.

Not to mention the really big one --- appearance. Not only didn't you have any control over TNO's appearance, but he was hideous. Though since the ladies seem to dig him anyway, I guess that's not such a bad thing. 

Actually you can be female in DA2. Unless thats not what you are talking about....  You can choose class and gender. Only race and appearance is predefined.  And now that I think about it... I dont see why you wouldnt be able to change appearance... I mean, pre scripted VAing shouldnt mean you cant change your appearance.

Modifié par TheSeeker2654, 26 juillet 2010 - 04:16 .

[DanaScu]

tez19 wrote...

yes i know he told me i spelt ignoramus wrong. keep up mate.

Sorry. Reporting the flaming and spam took too long. My apologies.

[Querne]

No I would not.

Producing deep-frozen rolls you will automaticly reach more people than a confectionist.

Someday you have to ask yourself where your personal limit is between telling a story and filling the stores.

It´s individual I guess, but sure no accident that designer often leave game companies grown too big and open up small projects on their own.

[Collider]

NP, I do what I can, lol. Well, what other assumptions can I make? Thats the way the gaming industry is going, and since I was so lovingly told that the young are now stepping over the bodies of us "geezers' to take power and all that, then I can only assume its the younger generation that is either doing the changing or is the impetus behind the change.



While you may be in the vocal minority in your age group. I have already been told by more than a few younger people in this forum that tactial combat, character customization, micromanagement (ie NOT mindless hack n slash) is out of date and needs to be "evolved". Since when is wanting a little tactical consideration in my battles an archaic idea?

Well for the record, I was parodying the bitter people who feel like Bioware is personally antagonizing them for the changes they've decided to make. I had fun.



While you may extol the complexity of "tactical combat" in RPGs, you'll find that many play Bioware games not for the raw gameplay, but for the story and the characters. I am one such person. Not all of us are hardcore gamers who play for the high scores or the best loot.



I found the Deep Roads section of Dragon Age: Origins annoying because it dragged on and there was not enough story interspersed between the painfully boring bouts with mindless darkspawn.



It interrupted the pacing of the plot and reminded me that I was playing a flawed game. Combat being more "streamlined" for me seems like a pleasant idea because it means I can keep my attention on the story rather than groaning at the amount of game over screens I get. Of course, you are perfectly justified if you prefer maximizing your stats to most anything else in RPGs, but as am I if I place higher priority on story and plot. And hopefully, you won't judge me for simply playing a game for different reasons than you.

[Amentep]

Querne wrote...

No I would not.
Producing deep-frozen rolls you will automaticly reach more people than a confectionist.
Someday you have to ask yourself where your personal limit is between telling a story and filling the stores.
It´s individual I guess, but sure no accident that designer often leave game companies grown too big and open up small projects on their own.

Of course that assumes that any/all changes made in any game are mandated by some corporate entity exercising creative control that over-rides the developers as opposed to being changes that were arrived at naturally by the developers themselves.  It also assumes that the only reason designers leave to form their own companies is because they find themselves at odds with their corporate side.

[Captain Iglo]

IoCaster wrote...

VGChartz methodology has always been suspect. I prefer to rely on actual numbers from a reliable source.  Dragon Age: Origins has shipped 3.2 million copies worldwide and Mass Effect 2 has sold through more than 1.6 million units of 2 million shipped. It doesn't matter how many systems each game was released on because it's a bunch of meaningless twaddle. There's a core audience for Dragon Age that isn't interested in Mass Effect

ähhm...It says in the IGN Report also 3,2 Million units of Dragon Age have been shipped, not sold. And in terms of game sales, there is also a big difference between a game that has been out 4 months (dragon Age in the IGN Report)  and one that has been out 1 month (mass effect 2 in the Gamespot Report)

[AlanC9]

TheSeeker2654 wrote...
Actually you can be female in DA2. Unless thats not what you are talking about....  You can choose class and gender. Only race and appearance is predefined.  And now that I think about it... I dont see why you wouldnt be able to change appearance... I mean, pre scripted VAing shouldnt mean you cant change your appearance.

Yeah... where I was going with that is that Planescape is supposed to be the epitome of an RPG and it's got a far more restricted protagonist than DA2 will. And a more restrictive plot in all likelihood.

I don't mind people not liking a predefined PC, but to say that this design choice somehow makes DA2 less of an RPG is weapons-grade B.S.