771 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

TheMadCat wrote...
Wouldn't you consider Paradox to fit that "large and cheap" method since they put out 3 or 4 titles a year on incredibly tight budgets.

Hmm... I guess I would. Funny I didn't think of them, since I play some of their stuff.

I don't know, maybe I'm the only one a bit creeped out by the fact companies are spending $20m-$40m and sometimes even more on one video game. I mean for God's sake some of the launch budgets the past few years have been large enough to buy a F-22 Raptor. I mean does it really need to cost as much to develop, promote, and distribute a damn video game as to build one of the most technologically advanced pieces of equipment in the world.

It does cost that much if you want the games to do what they currently do. It's not like they're just piling up the cash and setting fire to it; it's going to salaries for people who are doing work. Fire some of them and you'll get cheaper games. So who would you fire from the DA2 staff?

[Heimdall]

Haexpane wrote...

Wait the Witcher sold as many copies as ME2? WTF? I figured the thieves would pirate The Witcher a ton.

I still say, ME1 is the better game than ME2. ME2 has better technical qualities like the graphics tech, and control scheme. But ME1 is simply more fun, deeper, longer, and has a way better story. WAI BETTA!

Well, the Normandy was way better in ME2.
:innocent:

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 18 août 2010 - 09:48 .

[Haexpane]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Wait the Witcher sold as many copies as ME2? WTF? I figured the thieves would pirate The Witcher a ton.

I still say, ME1 is the better game than ME2. ME2 has better technical qualities like the graphics tech, and control scheme. But ME1 is simply more fun, deeper, longer, and has a way better story. WAI BETTA!

Well, the Normandy was way better in ME2.
:innocent:

Yes it was, and the Asses were way better in ME2 as well.  Framerate was better, etc.. I'm not afraid to admit which aspects were better :happy:  But technical improvements don't mean the overall game, which I consider "art" better

Kind of like Star Wars.   The technology for the prequel films is far superior, but they are they are vastly inferior to ANH and ESB as films

[Icinix]

Kalfear wrote...

Icinix wrote...

BioWare is evolving with the times.

Sometimes evolution goes in directions you wouldn't normally like.

We all have to adapt with it, as evolution is a democracy. The majority of what people want will win out.

I don't like it either, but it's either deal with it, or get left behind.

(Personally I'm getting left behind, always wanted to be a cranky old hermit.)

See, I dont disagree with you!

But thing is, where is this majority?

DA:O sold better the ME2
ME1 sold better then ME2
yet ME2 is the direction they are going

where is the majority?

The Witcher, on a shoe sting budget using a old Bioware engine is a better game then ME2 was or will ever be also sold same amount of copies using 1 less medium (Witcher was PC only) and WAY WAY WAY less media attention.

So what majority are you refering to?

Im all for change, I think every title should be upgraded and updated BUT you dont remove what brung you to the dance!

Ill make a freindly bragging rights wager right now that DA2 doesnt do 3 million sales because of the changes and ticking off its REAL MAJORITY MARKET . DA:O did 3.2 million sales.

Why am I so sure, cause this MAJORITY people throw out loosy goosy DOESNT EXIST! 
Bioware is never going to tap into Blizzards market because Bioware doesnt have battlenet style games
Bioware is never going to tap into COD or MW2 market, because Bioware doesnt make pure shooters
Biowares MAJORITY market is RPG, at some point Bioware is going to have to understand this and come home to them!

LOL, I just had some little kid on a differe forum tell me I have to change with the times? What times are these? RPGs have remained pretty much the same for the 4.5 decades I been around! Someone always introduces new bells and whistles but the base always returns to the basic format in the end.

So yes, change your products, update your products, but KEEP THE BASE!

And the base is the part that was missing in ME2 and the base is what people so worried about being gone in DA2. STORY, IMMERSION, RELATIONSHIPS, these are your base of which all RPGs spring forth from. They are and always will remain, now or a century from now, the BASE of all good RPGs, and no amount of bells and whistles or imaginary majorities will  change that.

Oh I agree with you, but the majority in this case is where the game sales are the highest.  Sure, selling a couple of million is nothing to scoff at, but its not selling 10 million.  Yes BioWares original fan base in this case are the people who have watched them since the good old days of isometric sprites, but BioWare want a piece of the bigger pie.  So they appear to be trying to saddle the line between what their fans want and what there is is to tap into.

Like I said, I agree with you and don't particularly like the direction BioWare is heading, but they weren't the first, they're not the only ones, and they won't be the last.  It's the changing face of computer games, the 'majority' are the millions who buy a game, play it for a few weeks, trade it in and move on.

Unfortunately I think the time and place for loyal fans (And epic role playing games) is fading.  RPG's are heading the way of space sims, MMO or nothing.

[AlanC9]

Icinix wrote...
Unfortunately I think the time and place for loyal fans (And epic role playing games) is fading.  RPG's are heading the way of space sims, MMO or nothing.

Huh? Are you saying that DA2 won't be an RPG?

[Mehow_pwn]

AlanC9 wrote...

Icinix wrote...
Unfortunately I think the time and place for loyal fans (And epic role playing games) is fading.  RPG's are heading the way of space sims, MMO or nothing.

Huh? Are you saying that DA2 won't be an RPG?

It will be... but it will more of an action advantrue.. ugh.. lets just hope they wount take away the entire loot thing and lvling..

[Icinix]

AlanC9 wrote...

Icinix wrote...
Unfortunately I think the time and place for loyal fans (And epic role playing games) is fading.  RPG's are heading the way of space sims, MMO or nothing.

Huh? Are you saying that DA2 won't be an RPG?

No, I'm saying what it says I said.

[Nerevar-as]

That MAJORITY numbers above remind me of 1984 with Big Brother rising prices announcing they were making products cheaper.

[DespiertaLosNinos]

Mehow_pwn wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Icinix wrote...
Unfortunately I think the time and place for loyal fans (And epic role playing games) is fading.  RPG's are heading the way of space sims, MMO or nothing.

Huh? Are you saying that DA2 won't be an RPG?

It will be... but it will more of an action advantrue.. ugh.. lets just hope they wount take away the entire loot thing and lvling..

I don't really understand this at a fundamental level.  I wouldn't say that Bioware needs to uphold some ancient idea of what an RPG MUST be.  I don't really believe that developers are moving away from any one genre but taking what works well from anything that fits.  If the underlining story and game are good why not get a little action game mixed into your RPG or visa versa?  Another thing, I can't imagine bioware doing away with leveling.  Even some racing games today have leveling.  But that's the point, why bind yourself to the limitations of adhering to one strict genre?  People don't **** because there is more going on in an action movie than solid action or flip their wig when a drama has a little comedy in it.

Judge the game based on its individual merits and flaws, not on it's ability to fit in an ever confining set of rules.  DA2 might be the worst game I ever play, but I doubt it will be because the game spanned more than one genre classification.  Of course you are free not to share my opinion.

[Vandrayke]

Mehow_pwn wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Icinix wrote...
Unfortunately I think the time and place for loyal fans (And epic role playing games) is fading.  RPG's are heading the way of space sims, MMO or nothing.

Huh? Are you saying that DA2 won't be an RPG?

It will be... but it will more of an action advantrue.. ugh.. lets just hope they wount take away the entire loot thing and lvling..

They won't remove those.  But honestly I think that loot and leveling as we know them are getting obsolete and that there needs to be a new method of character progression.  

[Icinix]

Vandrayke wrote...

Mehow_pwn wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Icinix wrote...
Unfortunately I think the time and place for loyal fans (And epic role playing games) is fading.  RPG's are heading the way of space sims, MMO or nothing.

Huh? Are you saying that DA2 won't be an RPG?

It will be... but it will more of an action advantrue.. ugh.. lets just hope they wount take away the entire loot thing and lvling..

They won't remove those.  But honestly I think that loot and leveling as we know them are getting obsolete and that there needs to be a new method of character progression.  

Just with that, and at the risk of getting mobbed.  I really liked part of Oblivions character development where if you ran / jumped / blocked lots those skills increased.  With that said, I'm off to work.

[AlanC9]

Icinix wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Icinix wrote...
Unfortunately I think the time and place for loyal fans (And epic role playing games) is fading.  RPG's are heading the way of space sims, MMO or nothing.

Huh? Are you saying that DA2 won't be an RPG?

No, I'm saying what it says I said.

But what you said doesn't make any sense unless you think that DA2 either won't be an RPG or will be the last A-list RPG. Otherwise RPGs won't be going the way of space sims, which don't exist as A-list titles anymore.

Or did you mean something completely different by "going the way of space sims"? If so, what did you mean?

[Icinix]

AlanC9 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Icinix wrote...
Unfortunately I think the time and place for loyal fans (And epic role playing games) is fading.  RPG's are heading the way of space sims, MMO or nothing.

Huh? Are you saying that DA2 won't be an RPG?

No, I'm saying what it says I said.

But what you said doesn't make any sense unless you think that DA2 either won't be an RPG or will be the last A-list RPG. Otherwise RPGs won't be going the way of space sims, which don't exist as A-list titles anymore.

Or did you mean something completely different by "going the way of space sims"? If so, what did you mean?

I was never talking about a specific game.  Many moons ago there was all different types of space sims to play, fantastic wondrous adventures.  Over time they began to shrink in number (With the ones left becoming more fly shoot orientated), then EVE came along, and then you'll have Jumpgate and later Battlestar Galactica later.  Only MMO space sims are left. (Very abridged history, but I'm late for work)

It seems RPG's are following the same lines.  It might take years yet, but thats what I was implying.  It seems  the RPG genre is making that shift as well, with the ones left, losing more of their 'traditional' RPG elements.

On DA2, I'm actually really looking forward to it and think it will be awesome, only change I wrinkled my nose at was the lack of race choices, but I'm over that now.

Off to work now.

[Bryy_Miller]

Icinix wrote...
 but I'm over that now.

Off to work now.

<_<

Yes, the "I'm over it, now off to do something productive unlike you" cop-out. Wonderful.

[hagren]

If Mass Effect (And Mass Effect 2) are synonymous with "rock bottom" for the thread starter, I don't know what a game like Rise of the Argonauts would evoke in him...

Remember Diablo 1 and 2? They were made in approximately the same time frame as say, Fallout and Arcanum. Very different games from gameplay and story aspects. My point? Action-RPGs co-existed with full-fledged ones before BioWare did their thing with Mass Effect, so it's not like non-full-fledged RPGs are a new phenomena. And you know what? Mass Effect was a great game. Mass Effect 2 was even better. Less RPG than before? Certainly. Still a damn fine, qualitative work with lots of effort and heart put into it? Equally definitely.

To be frank, I'm fed up by all these purists who can't accept that genres blend sometimes. As long as the final game is good, regardless of the type of game it is, we're fine. It would be great if we'd be more open for new developments, because a shooter that has so much thought behind it is better than a boring RPG that clings to the past (Dragon Age *cough*).

Disclaimer: I love cRPGs as much as the next guy. I don't think any RPG came close to the sheer amount of options that Fallout offered. But that doesn't mean that I'll exclusively and infinitely want to play the same thing.Thus, I welcome Mass Effect, and can only applaud BioWare for their writing and characterization talents, as well as for the impeccable art-  as well as sounddesign respectively the high quality of the voice work.

Heck, I'm even curious to see how DA2 will develop, even though DAO had disappointing combat mechanics and static dialogues.

Modifié par hagren, 18 août 2010 - 11:48 .

[Angelsdawn]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Icinix wrote...
 but I'm over that now.

Off to work now.

<_<

Yes, the "I'm over it, now off to do something productive unlike you" cop-out. Wonderful.

The "this is a cop-out, nobody has a life on these boards" cop-out. 

Assumptions are tasty.

[hagren]

Haexpane wrote...

Wait the Witcher sold as many copies as ME2? WTF? I figured the thieves would pirate The Witcher a ton.

I still say, ME1 is the better game than ME2. ME2 has better technical qualities like the graphics tech, and control scheme. But ME1 is simply more fun, deeper, longer, and has a way better story. WAI BETTA!

Eh. ME1 lacked variety in many areas, which is why it wasn't as good as it could have been. The story was slightly better (understandably for a first episode), yes, and I miss some of the RPG elements, but I welcome ME2's variety and polish.

[TheMadCat]

AlanC9 wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...
Wouldn't you consider Paradox to fit that "large and cheap" method since they put out 3 or 4 titles a year on incredibly tight budgets.

Hmm... I guess I would. Funny I didn't think of them, since I play some of their stuff.

I don't know, maybe I'm the only one a bit creeped out by the fact companies are spending $20m-$40m and sometimes even more on one video game. I mean for God's sake some of the launch budgets the past few years have been large enough to buy a F-22 Raptor. I mean does it really need to cost as much to develop, promote, and distribute a damn video game as to build one of the most technologically advanced pieces of equipment in the world.

It does cost that much if you want the games to do what they currently do. It's not like they're just piling up the cash and setting fire to it; it's going to salaries for people who are doing work. Fire some of them and you'll get cheaper games. So who would you fire from the DA2 staff?

You're making it sound like I'm picking solely on BioWare here, I'm not. These outrageous budgets are common place within EA, Activision, and Ubisoft and occasionally popping up in 2K and THQ. Modern Warfare 2 cost Activision a reported $200m when all was said and done. It's an industry problem with everyone trying to do the biggest things technoligically possible in the shortest amount of time and completely out do the competition. And unfortunatly it's far to late to stop it, people have come to expect what forty million dollars will get you despite being completely ignorant of the fact it cost forty million dollars. They need to stop enlarging the budgets every year and give the market a chance to catch back up so they actually stand a chance to make a profit on the actual product rather then relying on the franchise to prop it up. Long term investments in an incredibly fluid market such as video games isn't the best approach, the fact EA and Ubisoft have been in the toilet for so long should indicate that, not sure how well Activision has been doing of late, but WoW alone should guarntee them success.

Plus hey, not exactly thrilled to see people and corporations dropping 9 figures on a video game.

[maxernst]

Umm...I'm just not convinced that any of this represents a major change in Bioware. People do realize that Bioware made shooters LONG before Mass Effect. Ever play MDK2? And in their RPG's and hybrid RPG's, I really think they've stuck to the core Bioware formula. Isometric perspective was hardly a Bioware innovation, neither was using D&D rules. What distinguished Bioware was the mechanic of having one PC that the story revolved around that picked up other companions along the way each with particular personalities. Most (all?) previous squad-based RPG's always had you create a group of characters that did not interact with each other. What Bioware has done is continue to use that core design concept in different sorts of games as the technology has evolved.

And Bioware was always a mass-market oriented game. Do you really think they licensed D&D rules because D&D was the best possible system for CRPG's (despite clearly not being designed for it) or that they licensed the Forgotten Realms because it was so much more interesting than any other possible campaign setting? No, those choices were made because they were recognizable brands when Bioware was not, and they would generate sales.

Still looks like the same company to me.

Edited to add:  Okay, the Fallout games sort of allowed you to interact with your companions...so it wasn't really a Bioware innovation.  But Bioware did it with more depth so it was a much bigger part of the game.  They also allowed you to completely control your companions and used pausable real-time combat (unlike fallout, but like ME and Dragon Aget), so I'd still say this is a company sticking with what it knows how to do.

Modifié par maxernst, 19 août 2010 - 01:55 .

[AlanC9]

Icinix wrote...

I was never talking about a specific game.  Many moons ago there was all different types of space sims to play, fantastic wondrous adventures.  Over time they began to shrink in number (With the ones left becoming more fly shoot orientated), then EVE came along, and then you'll have Jumpgate and later Battlestar Galactica later.  Only MMO space sims are left. (Very abridged history, but I'm late for work)

It seems RPG's are following the same lines.  It might take years yet, but thats what I was implying.  It seems  the RPG genre is making that shift as well, with the ones left, losing more of their 'traditional' RPG elements.

On DA2, I'm actually really looking forward to it and think it will be awesome, only change I wrinkled my nose at was the lack of race choices, but I'm over that now.

Off to work now.

OK, that's clearer. I think you're just wrong, though. RPGs will be with us forever, unless your definition of an RPG wouldn't include something like ME2 or FO3 -- there are folks on this board who take that position, actually.

[ubasrawr]

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...

So I finally got a copy of game informer today (yes I know it is a bit late as everyone has read it already) and the first thing I see is this

Game Informer wrote...

After its (Dragon Age: Origins) release in November last year, the game enjoyed strong sales and critical acclaim. In light of these triumphs, one could easily forget that Origins was a considerable risk for Bioware's Edmonton studio. Presented as the spiratual successor to Baldur's Gate, Origins was charged with carrying on the legacy of a PC game released in 1998. In the intervening years, the role-playing genre has grown and evolved in many directions across multiple platforms. How players would react to elements like a silent hero and highly tactical combat was difficult to predict, especially with titles like Mass Effect setting new standards for conversation systems and cinematic presentation.

Any reservations about the design were put to rest with Origins release. Due to Bioware's skilful implementation, gamers accepted and embraced the old school aesthetic in Origins. But nostalgia can only carry a series so far. Where does one draw the line between homage and aging design?

Ok first of all the writer of that article gives Bioware too much credit but secondly did anyone else read from that "shallow action adventure titles like Mass Effect are the future of RPGs"?

[Begin Rant]

Also the article seemed to make out that the only reason Origins did so well is because of nostalgia and it reminded people of Baldur's Gate? I enjoyed Origins but I really diddnt feel that the game was homage to Baldur's Gate, if anything it gave off more of a NWN vibe but even that is a stretch. Origins was good, it was a hell of a lot better than Mass Effect however it wasnt great and it certainly wasnt anywhere near as good as the Baldur's Gate series.

But seriously how is Mass Effect a huge step forward for RPGs? If anything it takes a few steps back and forces you to play someone elses character instead of playing your own, also how is a voiced protagonist a huge step forward? I mean was it impossible to make a game with a voiced protagonist before Mass Effect came along? Was the only reason that games like Baldur's Gate and KOTOR diddnt have a voiced protagonist because it was impossible to do with the technology at the time? NO, it was because by not giving the protagonist a voice it allowed the player to give his own voice to the character and thus have more control over the creation of his character. Hell we had voiced protagonist back in the 90s but that only worked for predefined characters like Guybrush Threepwood.

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 but it isnt good for games where you should be able to define your characters personality. The dialogue wheel should only be used for displaying different approaches and moods of the same personality instead of trying to display the different approaches of different personalies, if you are going to define your own characters personality you really need to know exactly what your character is going to say and do when you click an option instead of finding out when you click the "sure I will have some cookies" option when speaking to the girl scout your character actually delivers a swift roundhouse kick to the head of the girl scout and steals the cookies.

[End Rant]

But seriously is this the death of the Bioware who made the great Baldur's Gate series? Over the years since the release of Baldur's Gate 2 I have watched as the games Bioware released got worse and worse until they hit rock bottom with Mass Effect, Origins was a step in the right direction and gave me hope that one day Bioware would return to the great company they were but then that hope was shot down with the announcement of Dragon Age 2 and its so called "Improvements". I had foolishly hoped that Dragon Age 2 was going to be a small hiccup and that Bioware would return to trying to make a game as brilliant and immersive as the Baldur's Gate series however now that I have read the game informer article I know that it is now wishful thinking. Bioware no longer cares about making immersive RPGs and instead are focusing on shallow sub-par interactive movies with predefined characters. The old Bioware is dead, I would have added "long live Bioware" to the thread title but that would imply I actually cared about the company which I dont anymore. Bioware has just become just another game developer churning out cheap mediocre titles for maximum profit and no longer cares about the art.

But please tell me if you enjoyed Origins have you actually played the Baldur's Gate series, and if you have please tell me if Origins actually reminded you of Baldur's Gate and whether you felt it was a fitting tribute.

I only played BG2, so don't know much of the feeling of BG1 except for the beginning of the game.

Anyways, DA:O didn't feel anything like BG2. I as player felt no motivation to have my character go after the Blight. I mean even except for the scripted you can't leave Fereldon, it was the only reason to keep me playing through. And maybe the prospect of killing Howel at the end.

I had hoped for a Irenicus type villain when I saw what Howel did, but to my avail, no such thing happened. And the hunt for the warden? A joke really, 1 assassin, 1 trap no more. Not really much of a hunt.

And why the **** did every npc I encountered knew I was a warden?

No, Origins was nothing like BG2 at all.

[In Exile]

Saibh wrote...

I dreaded the Orzammar level. I always saved it till last (which is what you're supposed to do anyway...). It was beyond boring. The Fade wasn't so bad, since once you memorized the order, you just ran straight through it. Orzammar was horrific.

I liked the Fade, more or less. Maybe I'm a sheep for the stat bonuses. I also think I fluked into the right order at first (get mouse, get burning man, get mage thingy, get golem, them empty level).

I hated the Brecillian forest the most. Find it incredibly boring. Orzammar is very boring until the deep roads, which while just non-stop grinding battle, at least avoid all the running around.

[AlanC9]

[quote]ubasrawr wrote...
Anyways, DA:O didn't feel anything like BG2. I as player felt no motivation to have my character go after the Blight. I mean even except for the scripted you can't leave Fereldon, it was the only reason to keep me playing through. And maybe the prospect of killing Howel at the end.[/quote]

Plenty of people didn't care much about Imoen either. But you all go to Spellhold because, in the end, there isn't anything else to do.[/quote]

[In Exile]

Kalfear wrote...
People keep reading units sent as units sold for ME2.

ME1 has sold more units then ME2 according to released financials that been posted on these very boards many times (so im not doing it yet again)

DA:O did 3.2 million units SOLD (maybe more now)
ME1 did 1.7 million units SOLD
ME2 did 1.5 million units SOLD (they sent out over 2 million units at the start but they didnt all sell)
Witcher did 1.5 million units SOLD (on one less platform...just for the guy whining about me and Witcher franchise)

The same EA link that mentions the 3.2 million DA units sold mentions 2 million sold for ME2. If you're going to call EA into question for the ME2 claim, there is no reason to accep the DA claim, other than bias.

Which of course you have, but that is quite another thing.

Cant say it any clearer then that, but ot wont matters as all these figures been posted before and the same people argueing them now, ignored the released figures then (you want trolls, stand up and be counted Exile and others)

These figures haven't been posted repeatedly. You keep listing them without explicit sources. I will be more than happy to admit you are right, so long as you actually cite your sources.

I happen to think you're wrong because if you're right that means EA is stupidly incompetent and incapable of even the simplest calculus of going off the greatest # of sales, and that just seems to conflict with a lot of their business decisions, which seem exclusively to go off # of sales.

In fact, if you were right, it would mean EA is doing the opposite of appealing to casual gamers, because it would  mean ME had commercial appeal, DA had far more appeal, and ME2 had the least appeal of all. Which means making DA2 like ME2 to be a decision of making a more niche game.

But let's get right back into it: please cite your sources instead of claiming them to be true by divine fiat.

[FlyinElk212]

Seriously, the Devs should release a list of things we can do instead of complaining about their games that aren't even out yet.

Like taking a walk to the park! Or wearing a silly hat!