771 réponses à ce sujet

[Chuvvy]

Did they drop any good loot?

[Dave of Canada]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Um, last I checked, F:NV was a full game.

Well. It depends on what one would call a full game. New Vegas is using everything from Fallout 3 but in a new setting, same engine / graphics and such.

[Bobad]

Slidell505 wrote...

Did they drop any good loot?

Just a Deep Mushroom

[filetemo]

Slidell505 wrote...

Did they drop any good loot?

:D

[Tsuga C]

eyesofastorm wrote...
You made what you call a "niche" game and it was commercially (not to mention critically) successful.  So was it really a niche game? 

Excellent question, EoS.

[Wompoo]

PC with a voice is fine by me. Do I miss certain aspects of older rpgs? hell yes. With consoles however, comes all the limitations of their dated and limited hardware (yes I have a console, it is slow, clunky and seriously lacking). I do agree however that the ME series is a rather shallow rpg gaming experience. The BG series was a massive project, and one that will never be done again (especially with 3d graphics). My biggest gripe about BW games is the way in which they are made (they all feel like NWN hub based stories with generic world environments and low poly and low textures) and the annoying over use of load screens. The excessive use of the companion system has also over shadow the PC's story (ME 2 was companion system gone wild, shallow main story and even shallower PC story... combat made for the lowest denominator). My biggest fear is DA2 being released like a console action title, that would make me vomit. Also there was a poor amount of variations in the armor in DA:O, nothing like getting a rare high end set of armor only to find it looks like your starter gear, very very poor.

Modifié par Wompoo, 16 août 2010 - 11:12 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Um, last I checked, F:NV was a full game.

Well. It depends on what one would call a full game. New Vegas is using everything from Fallout 3 but in a new setting, same engine / graphics and such.

But it's not an expansion. At most, you COULD call it a sequel.

[Haexpane]

Slidell505 wrote...

Did they drop any good loot?

And with that, Slidell has completely pwnzd the forums!

Well done sir, well done

[Dave of Canada]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

But it's not an expansion. At most, you COULD call it a sequel.

Yeah, I guess. Very limited in the new stuff, though.

[DPB]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Um, last I checked, F:NV was a full game.

Well. It depends on what one would call a full game. New Vegas is using everything from Fallout 3 but in a new setting, same engine / graphics and such.

But it's not an expansion. At most, you COULD call it a sequel.

And the first two games were like that too - the same engine and graphics in a new setting. Though going by the logic of some here, Fallout 2 doesn't count as sequel either.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...

KLUME777 wrote...

Why does everyone go on about how they think ME is a bad game?

Sure, i want ME to stay the hell away from my Dragon Age, but ME is still a great game, and this OP is making it out like its MW2.\\\\\\\\

Dragon Age should be Dragon Age, and Mass Effect should be Mass Effect, but thier both great games.

Well I dont understand the MW2 hate. Sure it doesnt re-invent the wheel but as far as multiplayer games go it is pretty well made and fun to play. Sure it isnt the best game out today and it probably gets more praise than it deserves from reviewers but if you take it for what it is it is a pretty good game.

Mass Effect 2 was a good game as well, while I am not a fan of the way a lot of things were handled I did enjoy Mass Effect 2 for what it was, while it wasnt quite as good as Origins it was so much better than the first Mass Effect which in my opinion is garbage.

But before I tell everyone why Mass Effect sucked so much balls and everyone just disagrees with me on principle without actually reading what I have to say why dont you tell me what made Mass Effect such a great game?

Was it the B grade sci-fi plot? The shoddy combat? The pop in textures? The horrible AI? The repeditive side missions and the fact that they all use the same 4 interiors over and over and over again? The boring mako planet exploration? Please tell me why you think that the game is so great?

Great new sci-fi universe.
Great story.
Great characters.
Great voice acting.
Great game play.
Great dialog.
Great moral choices.
Great replay value.


I like fantasy but tends to get be the same old cliches after awhile. And even though DA:O did try some new things it's still uses the same old cliches (the dalish elves still live in the woods and distrustful of humans, dwarfs are still basically drunken miners and warriors that live underground) that you see in just about every fantasy universe. So I tend to play/watch/read works of fantasy in small doses because I burn out faster on it than sci-fi.

I love sci-fi because of it's infinite varity and storytellling possiblities. The DLC is what is really keeps going in Dragon Age. Even though it had only 2 DLC adventures I played and beaten Mass Effect 1 over 20 times and the lack of DLC was never an issue for me because I had so much fun playing it on my Xbox 360.

If it weren't for the DLC like Leliana's Song and The Golems of Amgrrak I wouldn't bother playing Dragon Age: Origins for a LONG time on both my Xbox 360 and PS3, because I'm bored with it.  

[Dave of Canada]

dbankier wrote...

And the first two games were like that too - the same engine and graphics in a new setting. Though going by the logic of some here, Fallout 2 doesn't count as sequel either.

I'm just bitter because Obsidian tends to work on the heels of successful games and create buggy sequels using the same engine, graphics and stuff. Half the game is made for them already but they tend to screw up the other half.

[Haexpane]

dbankier wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Um, last I checked, F:NV was a full game.

Well. It depends on what one would call a full game. New Vegas is using everything from Fallout 3 but in a new setting, same engine / graphics and such.

But it's not an expansion. At most, you COULD call it a sequel.

And the first two games were like that too - the same engine and graphics in a new setting. Though going by the logic of some here, Fallout 2 doesn't count as sequel either.

Obsidian is making FO:NV.  They also made KotoR II

Call it whatever, KotoR II IMO is a better game than KotoR 1 for the first 80% of it.  Deeper, more challenging, higher levels.

IMO it plays out like a "full length expansion" which was fine by me.  If only Awakenings had been as long as KotoR II it would have been one of the best games of the year.

Without a doubt Obsidian is the master of making epic sized expansion/sequels and making them deeper, more complex and more interesting, but never losing sight of what made the original great.

KOTOR 2's biggest failing was Lucas Art's timeline for release,  Obsidian never got the chance to finish the game

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Tsuga C wrote...

eyesofastorm wrote...
You made what you call a "niche" game and it was commercially (not to mention critically) successful.  So was it really a niche game? 

Excellent question, EoS.

One he most likely won't get an answer to I've no doubt. I honestly thought Gaider's post was a weak sauce excuse for "stripping" the game down in the first place, you don't need to have a 5+ year cycle to make a deep and compelling RPG.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Haexpane wrote...

dbankier wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Um, last I checked, F:NV was a full game.

Well. It depends on what one would call a full game. New Vegas is using everything from Fallout 3 but in a new setting, same engine / graphics and such.

But it's not an expansion. At most, you COULD call it a sequel.

And the first two games were like that too - the same engine and graphics in a new setting. Though going by the logic of some here, Fallout 2 doesn't count as sequel either.

Obsidian is making FO:NV.  They also made KotoR II

Call it whatever, KotoR II IMO is a better game than KotoR 1 for the first 80% of it.  Deeper, more challenging, higher levels.

IMO it plays out like a "full length expansion" which was fine by me.  If only Awakenings had been as long as KotoR II it would have been one of the best games of the year.

Without a doubt Obsidian is the master of making epic sized expansion/sequels and making them deeper, more complex and more interesting, but never losing sight of what made the original great.

KOTOR 2's biggest failing was Lucas Art's timeline for release,  Obsidian never got the chance to finish the game

Part of that fault has to lie with Obsidian though, if they can't get a game polished and finished in say a 16-18 month cycle, don't sign a contract with that sort of time line.
Alpha Protocol being a perfect example, even after a year delay it still ended up being clunky and unpolished feeling.

[Haexpane]

So many Mass Effect 1 haters. Typical sentiment tho, the UNreal issue w/ Pop Up textures is always used as a "reason" ME1 "Sucked"



ME1 is an awesome, yet flawed game. Trying to explain why a technically flawed game is awesome to people who are very upset about texture pop up is impossible.

[Magonian]

"Did they drop any good loot?"
------------------------------------------

Slide!! that line is classic bro....

[Haexpane]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

 

Part of that fault has to lie with Obsidian though, if they can't get a game polished and finished in say a 16-18 month cycle, don't sign a contract with that sort of time line.
Alpha Protocol being a perfect example, even after a year delay it still ended up being clunky and unpolished feeling.

Well would you rather have no KotoR II or buggy KotoR II?   I never hit any show stopper bugs in KotoR II and it remains the best star wars game ever made IMO.  Even w/ the crappy ending.

Also note, that EA releases games every year on a 10 month cycle, never mind 16 month, and those games are buggy messes of beta testing (Madden)

I'm simply pointing out that people hammer on Obsidian, I'd rather praise them for taking on thankless tasks that generates countless internet hate rants and managing to come through with some of my favorite gaming ever.

If FO:NV is a total flop, that's another story.  But IMO FO:NV looks pretty gosh durn good for a 3D fallout.

[Bobad]

If the old BioWare is dead it's getting quite the epitath, also when's the wake?

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

pff give me a break either no one has faith in bioware anymore or the OP just wants attention

[ashez2ashes]

I feel you topic starter. That game informer article is annoying as hell. But we're a dying breed of gamer. Most people are more interested in the sound and the fury of cinematic games than a focus on gameplay.



On a random note, DA:O always felt more like a spiritual sucessor to Arcanum to me. God I loved that game...

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Haexpane wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

 

Part of that fault has to lie with Obsidian though, if they can't get a game polished and finished in say a 16-18 month cycle, don't sign a contract with that sort of time line.
Alpha Protocol being a perfect example, even after a year delay it still ended up being clunky and unpolished feeling.

Well would you rather have no KotoR II or buggy KotoR II?   I never hit any show stopper bugs in KotoR II and it remains the best star wars game ever made IMO.  Even w/ the crappy ending.

Also note, that EA releases games every year on a 10 month cycle, never mind 16 month, and those games are buggy messes of beta testing (Madden)

I'm simply pointing out that people hammer on Obsidian, I'd rather praise them for taking on thankless tasks that generates countless internet hate rants and managing to come through with some of my favorite gaming ever.

If FO:NV is a total flop, that's another story.  But IMO FO:NV looks pretty gosh durn good for a 3D fallout.

Oh no, don't take that post the wrong way, I enjoyed KotoR II for what it was even though it felt unfinished in some ways. I meant it more so that considering Obsidian is independant they should have some say when it comes to negotiating contracts that are long enough for them to actually completely finish the title they're working on is all I was trying to say.

I too am somewhat looking forward to New Vegas even though I'm not a big fan of the Gamebryo engine. Hopefully they actually had the chance to polish it this time as it seems to be a staple with Obsidian to not do so.

[AmstradHero]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Tsuga C wrote...

eyesofastorm wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
Well, I don't think anyone's arguing that there isn't some demand for games like that-- there is a hardcore market. It's just not a market that's really large enough to be profitable for today's triple-A games.

You made what you call a "niche" game and it was commercially (not to mention critically) successful.  So was it really a niche game? 

Excellent question, EoS.

One he most likely won't get an answer to I've no doubt. I honestly thought Gaider's post was a weak sauce excuse for "stripping" the game down in the first place, you don't need to have a 5+ year cycle to make a deep and compelling RPG.

Actually, it's a completely illogical question because it was taken completely out of context. David's quote was referencing gog.com and the games sold there. To turn the question back around onto DAO is inaccurate at best, intentionally deceptive at worst.

You want that game companies should try and produce games with outdated graphics but lots of content and still expect to sell them for the going rate of a new title? (About $100 where I live) You believe they should abandon all the technical advances made in the past decade and recreate games that would be deemed outdated (and a slew of other derogatory words) by the majority of the gaming public?

BioWare make triple-A titles and that carries with it a certain amount of responsibility and a lot of expectations. Triple-A titles have as much technical clout and polish as the developers can manage because that's what gamers and publishers demand from them. If you want something different to this, then go find and support indie RPGs developers that are making the sort of games you seem to want.

Me? I can appreciate both. I love BioWare RPGs because of the awesome story-telling, great characters and the way they keep pushing the RPG genre. That said, I can like games that' are practically inpenetrable to lots of gamers who can't stand "hardcore" RPG traits and (by modern standard) have ugly graphics. However, I recognise that the two are very different beasties.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 17 août 2010 - 12:08 .

[Morroian]

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...

The Dialgue wheel is a load of **** as well, sure it is good for games where you are playing a pre defined character like Alpha Protocol 

Good thing DA2 is a game with a pre-defined character then.