Wow people, NOTHING has been "disproven." Again, I post and hopefully you can start to understand it finally
"[Joystick] Why did you leave/forsake the "a la Baldur's gate" view on PC of the first Dragon Age?
[Mike Laidlaw]For budgetary reasons, we focused our work on a 3rd person view, that asks for very detailed and nice textures so that the player can admire the game with a close-up view. With an aerial view [isometric] we should cover much more ground and so create other textures. Now, the game mainly sold on console, so we're going the way of the audience"
I want to emphasize the "Now, the game mainly sold on console, so we're going the way of the audience" part of this response by Mike. BTW Mr. Laidlaw, I welcome any refutation from you personally of this statement with details supporting as such. Nothing would make me happier. Though, I won't hold my breath.
Disproven you say....again, let me refresh your memory with the offical restatement:
Mike Laidlaw wrote...
"Hey folks,
Victor
managed to hunt me down, and I wanted to clear up a few things with
regards to what I'm seeing as the two major concerns on this thread.
First
off, let's talk about the toolset issue. Obviously in this community
there's going to be some concern that we wouldn't release a toolset, so
let me clear the air a little: The tools we're using to make Dragon Age 2
are very, very close to the tools you guys have used to make your mods
for DA:O. They're not identical, as we've made a few in-house
improvements, but they're almost identical. As such, there isn't a new
toolset to release, per se.
While we won't be releasing a toolset
update in tandem with Dragon Age 2, we ARE investigating what it would
take to update the community toolset to match ours, along with providing
DA2 content in the future.
As to the subject of tactical view, I
can confirm that we will not be doing a tactical view on consoles,
though we are looking into some expanded party control that I think will
make console players quite happy.
On the PC, however, we are
still working with the camera to keep the key elements of the tactical
experience there. I was actually playtesting some new camera code when
Victor found me, in fact, so I can give you the latest news on that
front.
While we likely won't pull as far up as we did in DA:O, I
have always felt that the key to tactical play was actually freeing
your camera from the character you're controlling to issue precise
orders, which is what we're tuning now. So, this means you can still
maneuver the camera around the battlefield and issue orders from a
remote location, just as you could in Origins.
As you can
probably tell from my phrasing, all of this is a bit in-flux right now,
so things may change between now and ship, but I wanted to update you
guys on the current direction of things.
Mike.."
I apologize for pasting this again lengthening the post, but some people just don't seem to be getting it. HE DID NOT REFUTE THE "GOING WITH THE CONSOLE AUDIENCE" STATEMENT! Every bit of information officially given so far has never gone against what this quote is saying....its only supported it (If someone can find something to refute, please feel free to post....I want some good news)
Needless to say, the biggest problems I see is with more action in gameplay being a focus (read my earlier posts for "evidence" supporting this claim...evidence spoken by Laidlaw himself) and the technical aspects of the UI and other stuff (no baldur's gate camera angle (confirmed), no toolset (confirmed)). This sounds exactly like what they did from ME1 to ME2. ME2 was a good game, but cRPG-wise, it was an inferior product to the majority of long time (and not so long) cRPG players (we are not that few btw...look around at how many ppl are expressing their disconsent with this product's direction). Though there are ppl who just don't care period....I wish I was one, but I have passion for my games.
Just look around you and set aside all biases...and you'll see that it certainly does look like console crowd got the upper hand with this franchise which is VERY frustrating to players like me. Even more frustrating when you add in the fact that bioware started out selling dragon age franchise TO THE GOD DAMN old school cRPG players....only to get intertwined with EA and then all of a sudden, streamline ME2 and now, dragon age seems to be suffering the same fate. I'm not saying it will be a bad game (I'm sure the story, characters, lore, etc will be high grade Bioware quality). But it seems that they are deliberatly sacrificing the interests of players like me (again, we are many) for the almight dollar. Ya know, something EA would do. BTW, i've heard the two head hanchos at bioware (greg and ray) have high ranking positions at EA if that tells you anything.
It is a sellout.....it will be a good product....but again, they gave cRPG players like me hope for a "return to roots" franchise...only to immediately renig from what we know so far (and i think its enough to start complaining....now). So ppl on this thread who want to **** at me and say "go cry somewhere else you PC elitists"...YOU go to a different thread...there are hundreds. Find one that suits your ability to forgive and lower your expectations to accomodate, and talk there. This thread is obviously a complaint against these two latest developments (camera, toolset) so don't come in here to defend bioware. We have our rights to complain here (constructively I might add) without interference from, dare i say, fanboyism or ppl who don't care or support about these issues. Go somewhere else.
Finally, I would liek to apologize to ....uh.....Sahibi....whoever, sorry i forgot.....for saying your fanboyism was shameful. I should not have done that and instead, made a post like this. Again, I apologize.
Retour en haut
I think DAO is the only game I would happily buy on two systems just so I could play it 'as it was meant to be played'! I agree about the UI as well, the console one could use the odd tweak but that looks nigh perfect.
