1507 réponses à ce sujet

[Nerevar-as]

Actually It´s the other way round, The Witcher was many of the things DA was supposed to be: real Dark Fantasy (hardly another option with the source material, but DA was LOTR solutions to ASoF&I setting), (tried to be) mature in all the senses of the word, etc. Difference between European and American approach? Does EA has veto in some themes?

[SDNcN]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Actually It´s the other way round, The Witcher was many of the things DA was supposed to be: real Dark Fantasy (hardly another option with the source material, but DA was LOTR solutions to ASoF&I setting), (tried to be) mature in all the senses of the word, etc. Difference between European and American approach? Does EA has veto in some themes?

You do know that Dragon Age was developed by Canadians right?


Edit:

Is this some type of 'hur hur America is inferior to Europe' thing going on?

Modifié par SDNcN, 01 août 2010 - 11:12 .

[Calvinthesneak]

Hmmm Dragon Age had some pretty inventive solutions where you got to make dark choices. The real differences in Dragon Age vs the Witcher would be the focus of the theme. The witcher was not about love/romance rather than sex and nudity.



Dragon Age focussed more on romance, but obviously put sex into the game. Dragon Age also focussed more on inter party banter, just listen to some of the random dialogue that occurs. I would say Dragon Age had plenty of "dark" options, you could choose to do thinks like condemn souls, slaughter people, cut deals with demons, do things for the benefit of your own character solely.



I haven't played the Witcher in a while, but it was a more straightforward approach in that there wasn't a party. You could seduce women and there was some intresting dialogue with choices to be good and evil, though at the end of it all you're stuck with a good bent because your job is that of a monster slayer.



I think the big difference between the two games is the scope. The Witcher focusses on a single hero (Geralt) and what he does , which isn't saving an entire world so much as doing a dirty job that no one appreciates them(Witchers) for.



Dragon Age starts with a similar feel but you get pulled into major arc quests that go about saving specific parts of the kingdom. You have more freedom in choice of ways to pursue the goals, and what you wish to do, but at the end of it you're a Grey Warden and you don't really have an option to flee from that, because you're condemned from the start. So while you can lie, cheat, murder, steal, backstab you are focussed on a goal.



Overall I'd say the games are quite similar, just the Witcher is on a less heroic scale. You get a slightly different feel in that European perspective is different on sex, nudity, violence compared to that of North America.

[Tirigon]

SDNcN wrote...

Edit:

Is this some type of 'hur hur America is inferior to Europe' thing going on?

Why would it? I don´t think it matters who developed the game. I mean, it´s not as if Witcher hadn´t offended people in Europe; it is no surprise that it got the Adult only rating in Germany.

[SDNcN]

Tirigon wrote...

SDNcN wrote...

Edit:

Is this some type of 'hur hur America is inferior to Europe' thing going on?

Why would it? I don´t think it matters who developed the game. I mean, it´s not as if Witcher hadn´t offended people in Europe; it is no surprise that it got the Adult only rating in Germany.

I don't think it matters either. I was just pointing out that other people seem to disagree.

Overall I'd say the games are quite similar, just the Witcher is
on a less heroic scale. You get a slightly different feel in that
European perspective is different on sex, nudity, violence compared to
that of North America.

Difference between European and American approach? Does EA has veto in some themes?

well dragon age is an extremely americanized RPG, and I guess all the "hardcore" gamers in North America can think of themselves as mature players and that Dragon Age is so mature and dark

Modifié par SDNcN, 01 août 2010 - 11:56 .

[Drizzt ORierdan]

Calvinthesneak wrote "Dragon Age focussed more on romance..."



I think that the stupid use of sex cards give some players the wrong impression... Actually in "The Witcher" YOU have to decide in-game on a romance issue that will have "in-game" consequences... While in DAO you can pretty much skip the romances entirely... They are a nice add-on, but nothing more.

[DragonRageGT]

The Witcher has some awesome moments, just like Dragon Age has its own too.

Ths is one of them. When I first played I reached a totally different outcome and felt really fooled then. On following runs I knew better than rush to conclusion when proceeding an autopsy.

The Witcher - Busted - HD - Hard Mode combat w/ Advanced Alchemy

And the combat is a lot of fun too. Because, specially in Hard Mode with no clear tip about the timing for a combo strike, it is much more than just hitting combos. You have to study the opponent to decide which style works better and with advanced alchemy, not only we can make much better potions because of the dominant properties but there is also one particular oil for each type of monster. That's what being a Witcher is about, imho. Knowing your Art.

Modifié par RageGT, 02 août 2010 - 04:50 .

[AlanC9]

slimgrin wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

But how come we keep talking about Oblivion? Like it or hate it, its relevance to anything Bio does is pretty minimal. TW is different because it's trying to be the same kind of RPG that DA is.

Woah...wait a minute. I'd say CD Projekt is influenced by Bioware's games, no question, but TW is not trying to be anything but it's own game.

Same subgenre, then.

[asaiasai]

RageGT wrote...

The Witcher has some awesome moments, just like Dragon Age has its own too.

Ths is one of them. When I first played I reached a totally different outcome and felt really fooled then. On following runs I knew better than rush to conclusion when proceeding an autopsy.

The Witcher - Busted - HD - Hard Mode combat w/ Advanced Alchemy

And the combat is a lot of fun too. Because, specially in Hard Mode with no clear tip about the timing for a combo strike, it is much more than just hitting combos. You have to study the opponent to decide which style works better and with advanced alchemy, not only we can make much better potions because of the dominant properties but there is also one particular oil for each type of monster. That's what being a Witcher is about, imho. Knowing your Art.

I really loved TW because of that requirement for the requisite homework before you went out in the woods hacking and slashing. The many facets of alchemy with the ability to craft potions with positive side effects , like albedo which lowered the toxicity of the potions, or rubedo which increased the health regen. This stuff added depth to the combat system as such there was no one size fits all approach to combat. It was in essense skill of preparation and skill in combat, the balance that had to be maintained for the player to be victorious. There was alot more depth to the combat in TW than DAO, and again i am not saying that DAO combat sucked it worked well for what it was, but any spec with little preparation could go out and be succesful because you always had others along to get your back. the biggest factor in the combat was that DAO was designed to be played on both the consoles and the PC, as such combat in DAO had to be simplified.

Among the other things i respect about CD Project Red is that TW and TW2 are made for the PC only, there was some talk about a console version of TW called The Rise of the White Wolf which i think was scrapped, which means that as a PC user i will not have to worry about my TW or TW2 experience being dumbed down to satisfy the limited capabilities of the consoles. My new 3000 dollar PC (Trigon i just bought a second GTX480 to SLI and yes i have closed the box for the time being lol) will provide me an experience that console gamers can only DREAM about. Supporting the PC only market is a must if your a PC gamer. I just bought a copy of Star Craft 2 not that i will probably play it much, (still have not installed it yet) but i got a good deal on it, it is strictly a PC game which means that i have to support those companies that have the courage to dismiss the console market entirely.

What i am hoping for but will not get is a DA2 for the PC and a DA2 for the console, even though it has been rumored that there will be 2 combat systems one for the PC and one for the consoles, all one needs to do is look at ME2 to see those console limitations applied to the PC. As a PC gamer the console influences, hence the limitations to the PC experience will be as noticable as a sore thumb, because in reality the gaming experience from PC to console is noticable. It never really occured to me just how noticable it is until i sat down at a buddies Xbox and played some GTA4 reciently. I always wondered why the console players were not allowed to play GTA4 with the PC gamers, wondered that is until that moment. Then i realized exactly why, with out auto aim the console gamers would not be players so much as prey, that with out the computer doing the aiming for them the console player is meat because of the limits of the controller interface. The vast myriad of interface customization options avalable to the PC gamer from key mapping to mouse sensitivity to hardware options will always make the console pale in comparison and a the PC gamer will be on top. I am not trying to slam console gamers or thier systems, unless your one of those ****** that can not handle the truth, or jealous much, these are realities not opinion, even if you disagree, you sit down at my PC and the difference will amaze you.

Asai

Modifié par asaiasai, 02 août 2010 - 08:18 .

[DragonRageGT]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Actually It´s the other way round, The Witcher was many of the things DA was supposed to be: real Dark Fantasy (hardly another option with the source material...

All this talk about The Witcher... Since I've just finish a sweet run with G1 and G2, I'm picking up on my lastest run with TW, starting chapter 3 where I stopped it a while ago... it is definitely an amazing game. Of course after many runs thru it, all that was left was to try different skill poiints distribution. But after a few months break, the game feels fresh again and I've always thought it was too short, unlike some oppinions I read in this thread.

Even taking my time with it, doing all I can, reaching level 40 at the end, the end still seems to arrive too shortly. I have no idea how many hours it takes me in the end but it feels far less than my average 80 hours each DA run!

[Kalfear]

RageGT wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

Actually It´s the other way round, The Witcher was many of the things DA was supposed to be: real Dark Fantasy (hardly another option with the source material...

All this talk about The Witcher... Since I've just finish a sweet run with G1 and G2, I'm picking up on my lastest run with TW, starting chapter 3 where I stopped it a while ago... it is definitely an amazing game. Of course after many runs thru it, all that was left was to try different skill poiints distribution. But after a few months break, the game feels fresh again and I've always thought it was too short, unlike some oppinions I read in this thread.

Even taking my time with it, doing all I can, reaching level 40 at the end, the end still seems to arrive too shortly. I have no idea how many hours it takes me in the end but it feels far less than my average 80 hours each DA run!

To short Rage???

I always time a game on my first play through

ME1 = 40 hours
ME2 = 30 hours
DA:O = 40 hours
The Witcher = (just started Chapter 4) 50 hours played

Now it doesnt feel like 50 hours as the game been so fun so maybe thats where you thinking its short but actual time played, The Witcher is one of the longest games I seen in years.

Its like (for example) I played DA:O in like 3 sittings even though it was 40 hours long, time flew by I was so interested. ME2 on the other hand. I struggled through that in like 14-15 different sittings as it couldnt hold my interest and the combat focus of game got tiresome and boring. ME2 felt longer then DA:O just because of how many days it took to finish game. Actual time played however, DA:O was the much longer game.

Witcher like that, you sit and what feels like a few minutes goes by and suddenly you realize you been playing for hours and hours already! As I said, im at 50 hours played according to my steam login and really doesnt feel like it but this game is huge if you think about it! There is no 3 minute side missions in this game.

[Kenrae]

And the combat is a lot of fun too. Because, specially in Hard Mode with no clear tip about the timing for a combo strike, it is much more than just hitting combos. You have to study the opponent to decide which style works better and with advanced alchemy, not only we can make much better potions because of the dominant properties but there is also one particular oil for each type of monster. That's what being a Witcher is about, imho. Knowing your Art.

Wait, is not that way on other difficulty settings? I didn't know I've only played in difficult...
That's taking part of the fun in the game.

[Kenrae]

Kalfear wrote...
To short Rage???

I always time a game on my first play through

ME1 = 40 hours
ME2 = 30 hours
DA:O = 40 hours
The Witcher = (just started Chapter 4) 50 hours played

Now it doesnt feel like 50 hours as the game been so fun so maybe thats where you thinking its short but actual time played, The Witcher is one of the longest games I seen in years.

Its like (for example) I played DA:O in like 3 sittings even though it was 40 hours long, time flew by I was so interested. ME2 on the other hand. I struggled through that in like 14-15 different sittings as it couldnt hold my interest and the combat focus of game got tiresome and boring. ME2 felt longer then DA:O just because of how many days it took to finish game. Actual time played however, DA:O was the much longer game.

Witcher like that, you sit and what feels like a few minutes goes by and suddenly you realize you been playing for hours and hours already! As I said, im at 50 hours played according to my steam login and really doesnt feel like it but this game is huge if you think about it! There is no 3 minute side missions in this game.

Only 40 hours on DA:O?
My first DA:O playthrough was 100 hours long. My first The Witcher playthrough was 65 hours long. And my first ME and ME2 playthroughs were 50 hours long. All of them on difficult settings (the second most difficult on ME and ME2, don't remember the name).

Of course, I like to micromanage, carefully plan my approach, and just stare at the surroundings sometimes. I'm not a fast gamer (and I don't want to be one).

[wwwwowwww]

never played witcher, went to the site to check it out and pretty much all I can say is wow, but I say that about a lot of things until I actually play them lol

[Kenrae]

wwwwowwww wrote...

never played witcher, went to the site to check it out and pretty much all I can say is wow, but I say that about a lot of things until I actually play them lol

It's very cheap on Steam nowadays. It's worth it.

[Pedrak]

Kenrae wrote...

Kalfear wrote...

ME1 = 40 hours
ME2 = 30 hours
DA:O = 40 hours
The Witcher = (just started Chapter 4) 50 hours played

Now it doesnt feel like 50 hours as the game been so fun so maybe thats where you thinking its short but actual time played, The Witcher is one of the longest games I seen in years.

Its like (for example) I played DA:O in like 3 sittings even though it was 40 hours long, time flew by I was so interested. ME2 on the other hand. I struggled through that in like 14-15 different sittings as it couldnt hold my interest and the combat focus of game got tiresome and boring. ME2 felt longer then DA:O just because of how many days it took to finish game. Actual time played however, DA:O was the much longer game.

Witcher like that, you sit and what feels like a few minutes goes by and suddenly you realize you been playing for hours and hours already! As I said, im at 50 hours played according to my steam login and really doesnt feel like it but this game is huge if you think about it! There is no 3 minute side missions in this game.

Only 40 hours on DA:O?
My first DA:O playthrough was 100 hours long. My first The Witcher playthrough was 65 hours long. And my first ME and ME2 playthroughs were 50 hours long. All of them on difficult settings (the second most difficult on ME and ME2, don't remember the name).

Of course, I like to micromanage, carefully plan my approach, and just stare at the surroundings sometimes. I'm not a fast gamer (and I don't want to be one).

More than the 40 hours of DAO - my first playthrough was around 55 hours and I did nearly everything I could find except for some of the job boards sidequests, taking my time and talking obsessively to everyone - what amazes me is that ME1 lasted you guys so long!  I am neither a runner nor a completist and I finished it in 17-18 hours, Bring Down the Sky included, with no sidequests left except those "find the minerals, find the insignia"... you did lots of bouncing around in the Mako, I guess...

And if you think the Witcher is a long game now, you should have played it before the patch that reduces loading times when you enter a building... good times...

Modifié par Pedrak, 02 août 2010 - 09:49 .

[CalJones]

I just finished playing the Witcher (get the Enhanced Edition if you can). It is very good. Of course, you are playing a preset character - one who talks and interjects a lot without your prompting. But I can live with that. There's a lot of cool stuff - a whole detective "whodunnit" quest, for instance - and a lot of quirkiness in general.

Compared to Dragon Age I'd say the world is a little grittier (with a whole lot more swearing) but the difference isn't overwhelming. There are a few grey choices (such as which faction you side with) but I actually found most of the choices you make pretty black and white - most of the time it's pretty obvious which are the good choices and which are the evil ones. There really wasn't anything that made me agonise like my first time Landsmeet or picking a king in Orzammar.

[DragonRageGT]

Kenrae wrote...

And the combat is a lot of fun too. Because, specially in Hard Mode with no clear tip about the timing for a combo strike, it is much more than just hitting combos. You have to study the opponent to decide which style works better and with advanced alchemy, not only we can make much better potions because of the dominant properties but there is also one particular oil for each type of monster. That's what being a Witcher is about, imho. Knowing your Art.

Wait, is not that way on other difficulty settings? I didn't know I've only played in difficult...
That's taking part of the fun in the game.

In Novice and Normal modes, with the Isometric cameras, the cursor will scandalously tip you about the right time for the next click. With OTS camera, it's the weapon's trail that does it very clearly.  In Hard mode there are not such clear tips except for a very subtle and quick orange colour in the weapon trail with any of the 3 cameras. Hard mode is for players who are used to the game and have already a natural feeling for it. Plus, advanced alchemy is pretty much required to survive. Without reloading a lot, that is.

Kenrae wrote...

Kalfear wrote...
To short Rage???

I always time a game on my first play through

ME1 = 40 hours
ME2 = 30 hours
DA:O = 40 hours
The Witcher = (just started Chapter 4) 50 hours played

Now it doesnt feel like 50 hours as the game been so fun so maybe thats where you thinking its short but actual time played, The Witcher is one of the longest games I seen in years.

Its like (for example) I played DA:O in like 3 sittings even though it was 40 hours long, time flew by I was so interested. ME2 on the other hand. I struggled through that in like 14-15 different sittings as it couldnt hold my interest and the combat focus of game got tiresome and boring. ME2 felt longer then DA:O just because of how many days it took to finish game. Actual time played however, DA:O was the much longer game.

Witcher like that, you sit and what feels like a few minutes goes by and suddenly you realize you been playing for hours and hours already! As I said, im at 50 hours played according to my steam login and really doesnt feel like it but this game is huge if you think about it! There is no 3 minute side missions in this game.

Only 40 hours on DA:O?
My first DA:O playthrough was 100 hours long. My first The Witcher playthrough was 65 hours long. And my first ME and ME2 playthroughs were 50 hours long. All of them on difficult settings (the second most difficult on ME and ME2, don't remember the name).

Of course, I like to micromanage, carefully plan my approach, and just stare at the surroundings sometimes. I'm not a fast gamer (and I don't want to be one).

I thought Kenrae did it way too fast for DA:O as well.

My first complete DA:O playthrough also reached around 106 hours. About 80 to 100 hrs for the following runs. I could do it in 56 hrs once but that was really rushing with my main char recreated for Awakening (he had sacrificed in his first run so that was the only way I could bring him to AWK without a weird feeling). And for that I skipped most dialogues, cutscenes while still doing all that is possible to do in the game.

I don't recall how long ME and ME2 took me but I know it forced me to replay a few times (ME1) because to unlock Insanity diff we must first unlock Hardcore which requires a Normal diff run to start with, if I'm not mistaken.

I didn't time my runs with The Witcher but I always wanted it to last longer by the time I was about to end it. I wanted more Gold Talents! So, I guess it's not as though I thought it was too short. Just that I wanted it to last longer. Like most good games do to me. And they always end so shortly after we finally got those cool looking Armors or Weapons... I wanted more time to use them! =)

[Gaddmeister]

SDNcN wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

Actually It´s the other way round, The Witcher was many of the things DA was supposed to be: real Dark Fantasy (hardly another option with the source material, but DA was LOTR solutions to ASoF&I setting), (tried to be) mature in all the senses of the word, etc. Difference between European and American approach? Does EA has veto in some themes?

You do know that Dragon Age was developed by Canadians right?


Edit:

Is this some type of 'hur hur America is inferior to Europe' thing going on?

Last time I checked Canada was a part of the (North) American continent.

But seriously, I don't really get it either. Sure, there are likely some differences between games developed in different countries (on different continents) due to cultural influences, but I don't get this Europe vs America stuff.

[Nerevar-as]

SDNcN wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

Actually It´s the other way round, The Witcher was many of the things DA was supposed to be: real Dark Fantasy (hardly another option with the source material, but DA was LOTR solutions to ASoF&I setting), (tried to be) mature in all the senses of the word, etc. Difference between European and American approach? Does EA has veto in some themes?

You do know that Dragon Age was developed by Canadians right?


Edit:

Is this some type of 'hur hur America is inferior to Europe' thing going on?

No, it was not. Just the way some themes are approached. AFAIK, in Germany they are with violence worse than USA is with sex.
My first DA:O run was about 60 ours, I think the current one will be somewhere around 50, which was more or less as the Witcher. ME around 32 hours, ME2 around 40 before DLCs. Skipping dialogues cut ME lenght in half.

Modifié par Nerevar-as, 02 août 2010 - 11:51 .

[AlanC9]

You skipped dialogs on your first ME run? Or do you mean you finish it in 16 hours now.

Modifié par AlanC9, 02 août 2010 - 01:50 .

[DragonRageGT]

Yep, definitely the city population in The Witcher is way greater in numbers and liveliness than in DA, albeit they reuse the same model a lot, but with different "personality" to each one. At least very distinct lines that popup when Geralt gets near them. And some very funny too. Plus their behavior according to the weather. Like someone said here, it's very cool to watch them in the rain. Specially in the Merchants Quarter. It's fun to talk to every one of them and for some surprises too, which one 's better be prepared (with gifts, gems, gold, cloath pieces) if Geralt is to live up to his reputation. That's one thing I'd love to see in more games like DA2.

Now, can someone clarify one thing that I was never really sure about TW? Is the kid Alvin the Grand Master of the Order? How come the GM has the same amulet Triss gave the kid, at the end? But how could they both co-exist at the same space/time? (12 monkeys' army effect?)

Modifié par RageGT, 02 août 2010 - 02:19 .

[AlanC9]

RageGT wrote...
But how could they both co-exist at the same space/time? (12 monkeys' army effect?)

This isn't a real issue. Even if someone hasn't been born yet, the atoms that will make him up in the future are still there in the past. So you're violating conservation of energy regardless, although I suppose you can get around that if whoever goes into the past disappears from the future for a duration equal to his time in the past.

[Kenrae]

AlanC9 wrote...

RageGT wrote...
But how could they both co-exist at the same space/time? (12 monkeys' army effect?)

This isn't a real issue. Even if someone hasn't been born yet, the atoms that will make him up in the future are still there in the past. So you're violating conservation of energy regardless, although I suppose you can get around that if whoever goes into the past disappears from the future for a duration equal to his time in the past.

I hate when people bring scientific explanations to a fantasy world:P.

BE AWARE THAT THIS IS A VERY BIG SPOILER!

They're the same person, or at least, that's my take on it. He travelled to the past when the elves and the order started fighting since he didn't have fully control of his powers, much of it is hinted before the event (for example, if you talk to the other kids in the village). And when you fight him at the end he says something like "you were the one to say that the powers we have should be used to protect people", or something like that, which is something you tell Alvin (if you choose to, there are different things you can say to him while being his "father").
Ultimately his powers drove him mad.