424 réponses à ce sujet

[grv.digger]

Yeah-yeah, transforming Dragon Age into dumb_but_cinematic_ hack'n'slash_game_with_elements_from_mass_effect_and_god_knows_what_else is very generous of them. They just need to add few spells like "kill all" and "win game" and it'll be perfect game.

[BomimoDK]

Late, but meh. have tried to answer as best i can. I must admid, i can't relate to this panicky look at things so i might have gotten a bit over aggressive at times. it just means that i think it's... a waste of time and energy. Sorry if anyone gets offended.

Abriael_CG wrote...

BomimoDK wrote...
I imagine many Bioware employees think this is a very childish personal attack directed at their work.
What's your bas of this accusation?

Lol. I'll be honest, if they interpret my post as a personal attack and get bent out of shape, maybe they're not cut for this market, or any market that has a vocal fanbase. Try anime (I worked in it, and actually without hiding behind moderators and community managers, I sure know). In comparison, my post was very, very mild, and most definitely not "personal".

this isn't "vocal". it's just fools shouting down eachothers throats because they just need to see the devil everywhere. come up with a proper reason as to why DA should be as bad as you seem to know it will. you haven't yet.

They got Dragon Age looking and playing just fine as an old school hardcore, dark fantasy RPG where epic **** is centered around you and you have to make certain choices to make **** work= an RPG. i don't see anything wrong there.

Considering the BIG problems many users had just running the game "playing just fine" is a bit of an overstatement.

that's in the bug department, which we all loathed, not the gameplay/ RPG feature department and you know it. come up with something better sunshine or don't bother, my point still stands.

Or was it that they went for ONE action RPG series for consoles after countless games at a lower, more in depth pace for the (as they seem to imply themselves) intellectual PC crowd?

They already have one action RPG series for consoles. It's called Mass Effect, and they already dumbed that one down from chapter one to chapter two.
Turning the only in depth cRPG series they have (Dragon Age) into another console-oriented dumbed down action RPG would definitely be a big loss for the genre, and I don't think defining it a "betrayal" towards their most loyal fanbase is in any way exaggerated.

the reactions i see are over the top and childish. they streamline, change stuff around and suddently, a whole forum start confusing "only human playable" with "OMG CONSOWL ****S RAEPING MAH GAYM" Here's the deal: BG turned out fine, NWN turned out ok, KoTOR was a major success and Dragon Age: Origins was a smash hit return to the old classic days we all love. here's the thing i find momumentally stupid. You guys decide to ignore all this and stare at the deliberately console oriented story/character driven game with simple combat to compensate for restricted control, and label that= DA2 or Dragon Effect 2. that's where i start to think **** gets stupid. It's not a console title. It's a PC title with a Console counterpart, we WILL get a tactical overview somewhere over the battlefield and most changes are visual, superficial or improvements. same thing they did to BG2 from BG1.

I'm tired of these over the top reactions, idiots who don't see the full picture jumping to conclusions based looser than the proof of the positive opposite. could you please just take a break, a breath and stop panicking?

And we're tired to see people defending Bioware whatever they do. But you know? It's not doctor's orders to read our "reactions". You're entirely free to skip em if you're so tired about them. :innocent:
Other than that, we're paying customers as much as you are (probably more than you, given that most of the people that are displeased by what they're hearing about DA2 are the old Bioware fans that have been buying all their products since the very start), and we are entirely entitled to express our displeasure, whether you like it or not.

yeah, yo da old school. i've just, y'know, been playing mario for the last 10 years... how about you shut up and come back when you can back what you're making a fuss about in a believable fashion. the old "i'm a long time fan and Mass Effect was simple" is fail simply because it's obvious WHY it's simple and why at least the PC version of DA2 won't be.

You da man, yo think yo ben playin moar Bioware titles than me and you're instaright? newsflash sunshine, i've been through BG series, DA and ME. if that aint enough for me to be able to follow the discussion then i call Elitism. so far, i'm at least keeping a cold head about this. (the game, not you... i couldn't if i would man.)

My opinion and why i get aggrevated by these posts. no one seems to think too much about it, they just start expecting the worst instantly. so, y'know. no one forces you to post, you could just look up firm facts and look at past titles and LISTEN when the devs say that we get a framed narrative because they want to try something new, that the art could be changed due to that and all that stuff they tell us. We've had interviews which you can listen to/read. we've had PR bull**** which you can read between the lines, we've got pics, previews OF CONSOLE VERSIONS ONLY. we've had confirmation that PC will retain focus on tactical combat, only more reactive (here's where most idiots get it wrong and starts screaming "HAELEW! OH NOES!".

so, what i've gathered so far is that we get, Tactical, more reactive combat. Voiced main character because this specific character is preset and part of a set legend (does not guarantee future trend), we get leaps in time (may imply linearity, but i'm still open to possibilities), new art direction, (they tell us it's part of this legend and to me it sounds like it was the art direction that they would have wanted for the first one too. "gritty dark fantasy". I'm going to believe that for now.) Simple tactics screen for casual gamers (customization still implied since it hasn't been debunked, nothing wrong here).

want me to go on? IMO nothing's wrong here because i've been reading and understanding good reasoning about the changes from the devs. why do you panic?

I'll be deciding if it's bull**** when previews on the PC version start popping up. what about you?
I'm gonna take a breather and call this the end. i don't want a Mod closing this because i'm an idiot with some wish to remain positive ranting on offensive manners. see ya 'round.

Modifié par BomimoDK, 08 août 2010 - 11:42 .

[Morroian]

QQNwizard wrote...

I am aware they have action oriented combat, because I played the first one. At least they advertise as such, unlike DA and Bioware who just removes a key feature of its tactical nature simply due to not caring about the PC version anymore. 

Except they haven't. The camera will be lower down but still free roaming. It sounds like they want to keep the PC game play as tactical as possible. I'd rather the view from DAO and do wonder why they can't do it in DA2 considering the engine is largely the same but don't make assertions about them removing it entirely when they haven't. 

[QQNwizard]

Morroian wrote...

QQNwizard wrote...

I am aware they have action oriented combat, because I played the first one. At least they advertise as such, unlike DA and Bioware who just removes a key feature of its tactical nature simply due to not caring about the PC version anymore. 

Except they haven't. The camera will be lower down but still free roaming. It sounds like they want to keep the PC game play as tactical as possible. I'd rather the view from DAO and do wonder why they can't do it in DA2 considering the engine is largely the same but don't make assertions about them removing it entirely when they haven't. 

This entire thread is making assertions, not just me. Also, way to conveniently ignore my other three points. 

[Morroian]

There is actually a fairly definitive answer on the camera perspective from Mike Laidlaw, enough so that assertions now to the contrary look stupid. As for your other points I only wanted to reply to 1.

Modifié par Morroian, 09 août 2010 - 01:03 .

[Brockololly]

Morroian wrote...

Except they haven't. The camera will be lower down but still free roaming. It sounds like they want to keep the PC game play as tactical as possible. I'd rather the view from DAO and do wonder why they can't do it in DA2 considering the engine is largely the same but don't make assertions about them removing it entirely when they haven't. 

Its not just a free roaming camera though. Thats only half of it. The camera has to be pulled back far enough so that you can accurately assess the battlefield and make sense of whats going on. You coudl argue that the Origins iso view should have been able to pull back even further. So IF BioWare is zooming in even closer, unless they're making other radical changes to combat, I don't see how that helps you see the battlefield more clearly.

But essentially, Laidlaw did confirm that the iso view as it existed in Origins will not be present in DA2...

[QQNwizard]

Morroian wrote...

There is actually a fairly definitive answer on the camera perspective from Mike Laidlaw, enough so that assertions now to the contrary look stupid. As for your other points I only wanted to reply to 1.

The fairly definitive answer was, as stated by the above poster, that the camera as it existed on Origins was not going to be in DA2. How does that help your point instead of mine? 

Modifié par QQNwizard, 09 août 2010 - 01:13 .

[Bryy_Miller]

grv.digger wrote...

Yeah-yeah, transforming Dragon Age into dumb_but_cinematic_ hack'n'slash_game_with_elements_from_mass_effect_and_god_knows_what_else is very generous of them. They just need to add few spells like "kill all" and "win game" and it'll be perfect game.

Do you have anything to add to the discussion, or.... ?

[Divine Justinia V]

slimgrin wrote...

Forget what is console, or pc, or dumbed down, or outdated. This is about Bioware being generous to their audience and providing a multi-faceted experience, for both pc and console gamers.

THIS.

Modifié par VittoriaLandis, 09 août 2010 - 01:29 .

[Brockololly]

filaminstrel wrote...

I don't think it's really a big deal that the camera won't go as far back as before. The big deal for me is, why? Making it unable to go farther back doesn't make it better in any way, except maybe performance-wise, but... that's what we have PCs for. Or at least, that's what the adjustability of the video settings is for.

If you're trying to plan out attacks and not nuke your whole party with an AOE spell, its important that you can zoom out far enough to see whats going on.

But beyond that, yes, I'd like some rationale as to why they're changing up the camera on the PC. The whole textures argument seems fishy to me. At least in the sense that its BioWare skimping on one of the defining features of the PC version. And if BioWare is skimping on one of the big PC centric features, what does that mean for the myriad of other PC features like key bindings or graphics settings and the sort?

[Morroian]

QQNwizard wrote...

Morroian wrote...

There is actually a fairly definitive answer on the camera perspective from Mike Laidlaw, enough so that assertions now to the contrary look stupid. As for your other points I only wanted to reply to 1.

The fairly definitive answer was, as stated by the above poster, that the camera as it existed on Origins was not going to be in DA2. How does that help your point instead of mine? 

You stated that they've removed it. Thats incorrect, they've changed it, it will still be there just with a lower perspective.

[Apollo Starflare]

To me reading Mike Laidlaw's comment it sounded a lot like they havn't finalized what they are doing for the camera yet. Yes you can take from it that they are experimenting with different ways of using the camera (and no I don't see why they feel the need to fix something that isn't broken, but that doesn't mean there isn't a good reason either), however it doesn't mean that they have 100% guaranteed removed the iso camera from the pc version yet. At this point all we can really do is wait for some more information to come out, a gameplay trailer for both versions of the game would be brilliant right now...

[Dave of Canada]

As a console gamer who doesn't experience all the goodies of the toolset, I'd like at least that Bioware releases bundle packs on the console consisting of all the "best" mods with permission of their authors.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

grv.digger wrote...

Yeah-yeah, transforming Dragon Age into dumb_but_cinematic_ hack'n'slash_game_with_elements_from_mass_effect_and_god_knows_what_else is very generous of them. They just need to add few spells like "kill all" and "win game" and it'll be perfect game.

Do you have anything to add to the discussion, or.... ?

I dunno Bryy, I consider that post esentially telling it like it is. Most of the old timers have seen it coming for a while now.

[MerinTB]

Morroian wrote...

QQNwizard wrote...

Morroian wrote...
There is actually a fairly definitive answer on the camera perspective from Mike Laidlaw, enough so that assertions now to the contrary look stupid. As for your other points I only wanted to reply to 1.

The fairly definitive answer was, as stated by the above poster, that the camera as it existed on Origins was not going to be in DA2. How does that help your point instead of mine?

You stated that they've removed it. Thats incorrect, they've changed it, it will still be there just with a lower perspective.

Let me show where I pick to emphasize what he said -

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.

Contextually looking at what he said.

Mike says he considers the key elements of the tactical experience are trying to be kept with the camera control.  Not pull up for an overhead view, he notes, but he thinks moving the camera around the battlefield, free from your currently controlled character, is the key.

I disagree.  You can do that manuevering from the over the shoulder view point and it means nothing to me, personally.  Your opinions may vary, as Mike's clearly does.  I want to pull way up and see most of the battlefield, and if my currently controlled character is smack dab in the center of that and I can't change that, that is absolutely fine to me.  Freeing the camera just means lots of confusing scrolling.  Above the battlefield, the overhead view, let's me plan tactics much easier and quicker.

The console has this view absolutely forgotten about from the get-go.  They are "trying" (my paraphrase of "still working with") to keep the "key elements of the tactical experience" - but, as he states, things are still "in-flux" and therefore "may change between now and ship."

The "current direction" is that for two of three platforms, focus on more quick-paced, "action" (I think hack-slash for that) oriented combat, and the "still working with" "keeping the key elements of the tactical experience" in the last platform.

Personal preference aside, if I were in charge of the company making this game I would say "Why are you developing two different combat systems for this game?  If the one you are making for two of the three platforms will work well on the third, why make a different one?  Make one game, stop wasting development time and resources on this."

It's not doom-saying to expect the tactical PC combat experience to be lost eventually.  It's what you expect from any business concerned with it's bottom-line, streamline the development as much as possible and reuse all assets that you can.

Modifié par MerinTB, 09 août 2010 - 02:24 .

[Brockololly]

Dave of Canada wrote...

As a console gamer who doesn't experience all the goodies of the toolset, I'd like at least that Bioware releases bundle packs on the console consisting of all the "best" mods with permission of their authors.

The problem with that is that MS or Sony would likely want it all as paid DLC. And I can't imagine that would go over  well having the modders' work sold without any say on their part. And considering many of the best mods out now are more like fixes to the core game of stuff that should be there, they'd be more like patches...

[Rubbish Hero]

Yes, the pc gaming mentality goes against the heartless, squeeze you for everything you have console mentality. It's partly why the gaming media is attempting to kill pc gaming with negative propaganda.

[jpdipity]

BomimoDK wrote...

My opinion and why i get aggrevated by these posts. no one seems to think too much about it, they just start expecting the worst instantly. so, y'know. no one forces you to post, you could just look up firm facts and look at past titles and LISTEN when the devs say that we get a framed narrative because they want to try something new, that the art could be changed due to that and all that stuff they tell us. We've had interviews which you can listen to/read. we've had PR bull**** which you can read between the lines, we've got pics, previews OF CONSOLE VERSIONS ONLY. we've had confirmation that PC will retain focus on tactical combat, only more reactive (here's where most idiots get it wrong and starts screaming "HAELEW! OH NOES!".

so, what i've gathered so far is that we get, Tactical, more reactive combat. Voiced main character because this specific character is preset and part of a set legend (does not guarantee future trend), we get leaps in time (may imply linearity, but i'm still open to possibilities), new art direction, (they tell us it's part of this legend and to me it sounds like it was the art direction that they would have wanted for the first one too. "gritty dark fantasy". I'm going to believe that for now.) Simple tactics screen for casual gamers (customization still implied since it hasn't been debunked, nothing wrong here).

want me to go on? IMO nothing's wrong here because i've been reading and understanding good reasoning about the changes from the devs. why do you panic?

I'll be deciding if it's bull**** when previews on the PC version start popping up. what about you?
I'm gonna take a breather and call this the end. i don't want a Mod closing this because i'm an idiot with some wish to remain positive ranting on offensive manners. see ya 'round.

Completely agree with BomimoDK.  Unfortunately, there is a lot of willy-nilly mob-induced panic going on in the community.

Nearly every interview/article that I've read that discusses combat in DA2 states that the PC version will have tactical combat.  I trust that the developers would not make a consistent effort to make this a point and then make it difficult for the player to play tactically - it doesn't make sense.  I love that they are making the combat systems different for PC and console.  I play both platforms and this is a welcome addition. 

As of Feb 2010, PC versions of the game made up 40% of the sales in DA:O.  According to PC Gaming Alliance, although perhaps a slanted source, claim that 60% of US adults play video/computer games and 59% of them prefer the PC platform.  So, I find it highly unlikely that PC players will pushed aside. 

I sincerely hope that they find a way to update the toolset for DA2.  The fact that they are looking into it tells me that if they find a way to reasonably do it - it will be released to the public.  Why else would they even bother looking into it at all?

When it is closer to release date and we have some real, concrete information & PC gameplay videos then I'll make an educated decision to buy or not buy DA2.  Until then, I eagerly await the new news as it is revealed.

Modifié par jpdipity, 09 août 2010 - 03:17 .

[TheMadCat]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

To me reading Mike Laidlaw's comment it sounded a lot like they havn't finalized what they are doing for the camera yet. Yes you can take from it that they are experimenting with different ways of using the camera (and no I don't see why they feel the need to fix something that isn't broken, but that doesn't mean there isn't a good reason either), however it doesn't mean that they have 100% guaranteed removed the iso camera from the pc version yet. At this point all we can really do is wait for some more information to come out, a gameplay trailer for both versions of the game would be brilliant right now...

See, that's one of the things that seemed a bit fishy to me. They're this far into development and still don't have a complete idea on what they're going to doing with the camera for the PC? The toolset is understandable, ultimately whether it comes out or not isn't even going to be BIoWare's call, it'll be EA's. But with less then 9 months left before the targeted launch I wouldn't think the direction they're taking with the camera of all things would really be in flux.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 09 août 2010 - 03:29 .

[In Exile]

[quote]QQNwizard wrote...

Paraphrasing, because it was created by a non-American/English company. Expected. [/quote]

Paraphrased VO is the bane of all existed in DA, but suddenly it is no big deal because TW is not a game designed in North America? How does this have any logical connection to the design element of the dialogue wheel and paraphrases?

[quote]QTE offers more choice than just watching a predetermined cut scene unfold.[/quote]

So if Bioware added QTE to "get you closer to the action," and "make the game more dynamic" that would be good?

[quote]I am aware they have action oriented combat, because I played the first one. At least they advertise as such, unlike DA and Bioware who just removes a key feature of its tactical nature simply due to not caring about the PC version anymore. By the way, The Witcher 2 is made primarily with the PC in mind. Consoles are being considered, but at this point it's only speculation. PC is first. [/quote]

Who cares? Why does it matter if they're not designing a game with isometric click based party combat?

Whatever they say , they are designing a game with absolutely the same intent, and even then, that would be only if Bioware also removed party control.

So if TW never had a party, removed isometric combat and was always action oriented, this is a brilliant move that favours the PC. If Bioware removes the party, removes isometric combat, and makes combat more action oriented, this is a betrayal of everything hte PC stands for?

What?

[quote[And is Hawke really customizable anymore? He's locked in to be human too. Sure, you can choose gender and facial structure and whatnot, but compared to the first game a lot of customization options were taken away. Regardless of how you change his appearance, his origin story will be the same. So, disregarding cosmetics, both the Witcher and DA2 will have fixed non customizable human protagonists, as you say. [/quote]

Did you not read your own post? Hawke is more customizable precisely beacuse you can choose gender and apperance. What the hell are you doing if not customizing when you are doing these two things?

By all means, praise the Wticher for being a brilliant game. Be excited for the Witcher 2 - I know I am. But don't slobber CD Projekt for doing exactly what Bioware is doing.

[Morroian]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

To me reading Mike Laidlaw's comment it sounded a lot like they havn't finalized what they are doing for the camera yet. Yes you can take from it that they are experimenting with different ways of using the camera  

Well yeah they haven't finalized it yet but I took his statement to mean that they are still working out the exact height but the camera would still be free roaming.

[Dave of Canada]

Brockololly wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

As a console gamer who doesn't experience all the goodies of the toolset, I'd like at least that Bioware releases bundle packs on the console consisting of all the "best" mods with permission of their authors.

The problem with that is that MS or Sony would likely want it all as paid DLC. And I can't imagine that would go over  well having the modders' work sold without any say on their part. And considering many of the best mods out now are more like fixes to the core game of stuff that should be there, they'd be more like patches...

I know.

I just want it.

[In Exile]

slimgrin wrote...

Forget what is console, or pc, or dumbed down, or outdated. This is about Bioware being generous to their audience and providing a multi-faceted experience, for both pc and console gamers. We are asking them to put in the extra effort. That means providing the broadest gaming experience possible: multiple views, a tool set, and total freedom with customizing your character and control schemes.

When you say broadest experience possible, you mean a special and distinct game for the PC than the consoles, with the consoles getting at worst a port of the game if not an entirely redesigned game, no?

Look - lambast Bioware for failing to design the game you want. Critize them for removing features or like. But keep the entitlement aside.

[Morroian]

MerinTB wrote...

I disagree.  You can do that manuevering from the over the shoulder view point and it means nothing to me, personally.  Your opinions may vary, as Mike's clearly does.  I want to pull way up and see most of the battlefield, and if my currently controlled character is smack dab in the center of that and I can't change that, that is absolutely fine to me.  Freeing the camera just means lots of confusing scrolling.  Above the battlefield, the overhead view, let's me plan tactics much easier and quicker.

I agree with that. I said previously I'd rather keep this view and its a bit mystifying that they can't do it considering the engine is meant to be largely the same.

MerinTB wrote...
The console has this view absolutely forgotten about from the get-go.  They are "trying" (my paraphrase of "still working with") to keep the "key elements of the tactical experience" - but, as he states, things are still "in-flux" and therefore "may change between now and ship."

Yeah but I didn't interpret him as saying that it might not be in there at all just that they're trying to work out the exact mechanics. It does seem like they're cutting things fine though.