925 réponses à ce sujet

[2papercuts]

Litos456 wrote...

Guys has Bioware failed us once?
No

awakening

[Arttis]

Riona45 wrote...

Litos456 wrote...

Guys has Bioware failed us once?

There's no objective answer to that.  I don't feel they've ever "failed" me, others may feel differently.

Bioware has failed to give the cerberus network card owners all DLC for free as advertised on their site.ALso saying it was CE only.
I believe they can fail in these ways with DA2/.

[Tirigon]

RPG purists are usually very stupid, just like all conservative people.

[Guertyras]

You know, they are already doing that, no matter what what fan says , like it or not they are making it more like mass effect. Less character customization to barely non at all, tactical combat replaced by a more action oriented one. the reason is obvious, it took them way too long to produce the first dragon age, and with EA they cant afford such long development time. They have to shove a game a year down our throat.Its way faster to have one character and make the combat part a shooter/hack and slash.

Anyway the vast majority of bioware fans will be satisfied as long theres a story with cinematics, good looking guy/girl to romance, and some filler between: 6 digits sales for sure + DLCs.

[Whailor]

Baldur's Gate series is still in many regards better then DA: O, though the difference is not huge. All in all DA is a good RPG game and especially in these times when RPG games seem to be kind of dwindling away. So many games now are plain boring shooters where Developers think that they can say it's an RPG just because the main char occasionally says few lines. There seems to be more repetitiveness in DA: O and everything is always the same, something which didn't feel so in BG since there was many small nuances which allowed the experience to vary, but all in all DA is still a good RPG.

[Merced256]

Tirigon wrote...

RPG purists are usually very stupid, just like all conservative people.

I'm wondering if someone can really be stupid enough to actually believe your statement. I can make the statement that everyone named tirigon is a ****ing moron, but i'd have more basis and proof than you did when you made your statement.

[MortalEngines]

Guertyras wrote...

You know, they are already doing that, no matter what what fan says , like it or not they are making it more like mass effect. Less character customization to barely non at all, tactical combat replaced by a more action oriented one. the reason is obvious, it took them way too long to produce the first dragon age, and with EA they cant afford such long development time. They have to shove a game a year down our throat.Its way faster to have one character and make the combat part a shooter/hack and slash.
Anyway the vast majority of bioware fans will be satisfied as long theres a story with cinematics, good looking guy/girl to romance, and some filler between: 6 digits sales for sure + DLCs.

Sorry but you're generalizing too much. Judging from the threads around here complaining and worrying about the implementation of some features in DA2, what you said can't be further from the truth. Most people around here want a solid RPG, not a interactive film (ala Heavy Rain), they want skill trees, engaging and challenging combat, fantastic writing, good story and lore.

You have no right to say what Bioware fans do and don't want and what they will be sastified with. Last time I checked you didn't have access to everyone's head. Also while I detest EA's influence on Bioware, I feel that Bioware has always done their best to hand out a product that suits the fanbase. Just look at the all the responses from the Bioware team themselves, alot of developers would never bother replying on forums.

And what is with everyone bashing ME as some generic shooter? Sure it's not fantastic RPG and it's not complex and mindblowing in terms of skills, but it's still a good game, I still enjoyed it. Whether or not it came up to the standards traditional RPGs. 

Why must something be a BG clone to be a good game? Every game comes under a genre, doesn't make one game harder/better/complex than another. I get annoyed when people complain that games like ME are 'dumbed down' when most RPGs aren't hard in the first place. Who are you to say this sort of stuff? 

As much as I love BG (it's better than DA in some aspects), redoing the same old formula all the time would just cause the fanbase to want a refresh, which is what the ME and DA series are trying to do. Also the dev teams for ME and DA have the same people in it (generally) so of course there are going to be similarities.

But the end of the day, DA will be DA and ME will be ME.

Modifié par MortalEngines, 29 août 2010 - 01:39 .

[Merced256]

MortalEngines wrote...

Guertyras wrote...

You know, they are already doing that, no matter what what fan says , like it or not they are making it more like mass effect. Less character customization to barely non at all, tactical combat replaced by a more action oriented one. the reason is obvious, it took them way too long to produce the first dragon age, and with EA they cant afford such long development time. They have to shove a game a year down our throat.Its way faster to have one character and make the combat part a shooter/hack and slash.
Anyway the vast majority of bioware fans will be satisfied as long theres a story with cinematics, good looking guy/girl to romance, and some filler between: 6 digits sales for sure + DLCs.

Why must something be a BG clone to be a good game? Every game comes under a genre, doesn't make one game harder/better/complex than another. I get annoyed when people complain that games like ME are 'dumbed down' when most RPGs aren't hard in the first place. Who are you to say this sort of stuff? 

I believe it comes to down replayability in this case. ME2 was decent enough the first time around. But the story and any optional routes you could take were negligible. This is largely true of DA:O as well. The key difference being DA:O was more "roleplaying" oriented because you had races, no protagonist VO, and multiple classes each with multiple ways of effectively subspeccing. ME2 had "classes" and it might have added to the replayability of the game if you know.. there were more skills in general, the skills were effective or at least a necessity, and so on and so forth. ME2 could be beaten with out taking a single box, let alone one that contained a super kewlz skill.

Modifié par Merced256, 29 août 2010 - 01:39 .

[MortalEngines]

Merced256 wrote...

MortalEngines wrote...

Guertyras wrote...

You know, they are already doing that, no matter what what fan says , like it or not they are making it more like mass effect. Less character customization to barely non at all, tactical combat replaced by a more action oriented one. the reason is obvious, it took them way too long to produce the first dragon age, and with EA they cant afford such long development time. They have to shove a game a year down our throat.Its way faster to have one character and make the combat part a shooter/hack and slash.
Anyway the vast majority of bioware fans will be satisfied as long theres a story with cinematics, good looking guy/girl to romance, and some filler between: 6 digits sales for sure + DLCs.

Why must something be a BG clone to be a good game? Every game comes under a genre, doesn't make one game harder/better/complex than another. I get annoyed when people complain that games like ME are 'dumbed down' when most RPGs aren't hard in the first place. Who are you to say this sort of stuff? 

I believe it comes to down replayability in this case. ME2 was decent enough the first time around. But the story and any optional routes you could take were negligible. This is largely true of DA:O as well. The key difference being DA:O was more "roleplaying" oriented because you had races, no protagonist VO, and multiple classes each with multiple ways of effectively subspeccing. ME2 had "classes" and it might have added to the replayability of the game if you know.. there were more skills in general, the skills were effective or at least a necessity, and so on and so forth. ME2 could be beaten with out taking a single box, let alone one that contained a super kewlz skill.

No I understand completely, in my opinion BG IS better than DA, but BG is nothing extremely original or special, it simple intergated old school D&D into a video game (the only unique thing was characters and story). DA and ME are both trying to bring a newness and freshness to a genre that has become very much stuck in the past. 

Look at some of the MMORPGs out there, they're all similar, all the same, eventually there is going to be an MMORPG that will bring a new trend in, it's the same with RPG.

DA and ME are only setting the ball rolling, they're not prefect but they are opening a whole box of opportunities for the future RPG games.

Modifié par MortalEngines, 29 août 2010 - 01:43 .

[Woodey]

 
There are dozens of FPS games every year.  Why do you think that the last few real RPGs should be eliminated for your pleasure? 

It is very selfish of you.  Go find the games you like and have joy of them but leave our RPGs, as few as they are, alone.

[Merced256]

MortalEngines wrote...

Merced256 wrote...

MortalEngines wrote...

Guertyras wrote...

You know, they are already doing that, no matter what what fan says , like it or not they are making it more like mass effect. Less character customization to barely non at all, tactical combat replaced by a more action oriented one. the reason is obvious, it took them way too long to produce the first dragon age, and with EA they cant afford such long development time. They have to shove a game a year down our throat.Its way faster to have one character and make the combat part a shooter/hack and slash.
Anyway the vast majority of bioware fans will be satisfied as long theres a story with cinematics, good looking guy/girl to romance, and some filler between: 6 digits sales for sure + DLCs.

Why must something be a BG clone to be a good game? Every game comes under a genre, doesn't make one game harder/better/complex than another. I get annoyed when people complain that games like ME are 'dumbed down' when most RPGs aren't hard in the first place. Who are you to say this sort of stuff? 

I believe it comes to down replayability in this case. ME2 was decent enough the first time around. But the story and any optional routes you could take were negligible. This is largely true of DA:O as well. The key difference being DA:O was more "roleplaying" oriented because you had races, no protagonist VO, and multiple classes each with multiple ways of effectively subspeccing. ME2 had "classes" and it might have added to the replayability of the game if you know.. there were more skills in general, the skills were effective or at least a necessity, and so on and so forth. ME2 could be beaten with out taking a single box, let alone one that contained a super kewlz skill.

Look at some of the MMORPGs out there, they're all similar, all the same, eventually there is going to be an MMORPG that will bring a new trend in, it's the same with RPG.

DA and ME are only setting the ball rolling, they're not prefect but they are opening a whole box of opportunities for the future RPG games.

You mean post-WoW. Before WoW there were only a handful of MMOs and those that existed were generally very different from each other. Since WoW brought in the casual market, and dare i say.. dumbed down the genre, every game since has copied the model. Even Bioware. I'm not sure how that can be viewed as a good thing. New hotness and all that is nice, but only when its original. Mashing dynasty wars with a crpg might be original but you know what they say about oil and water.

[wakkawakkahey]

I agree with OP

[MortalEngines]

Woodey wrote...

 
There are dozens of FPS games every year.  Why do you think that the last few real RPGs should be eliminated for your pleasure? 

It is very selfish of you.  Go find the games you like and have joy of them but leave our RPGs, as few as they are, alone.

Wow, way to completely twist what I said. Firstly, let me clear this up I DO NOT WANT DA TO BE A FPS. Nor do I want ME to be. Where you drew this conclusion from is completely beyond me, if I want an FPS I buy an FPS game.

That being said, it's very selfish of you to say that what you view is an RPG is what all RPGs should be like, this isn't directed at Woodey per say, but to all those you place tags on whether a game is an RPG or not, everyone has there own thoughts on what makes a good RPG and a bad one, they are is not reason to generalize and claim people want dumbed down RPGs.

I'm also going back to the point that RPGs aren't super complicated and never have been. Sure, some find them difficult but the average gamer can deal with them pretty well, I'm tried of people claiming higher intellect because they think it takes extra brains cells to play and RPG than any other genre (I find Survivual horror games much harder than RPGs but that's my person view).

Merced256 wrote...
You mean post-WoW. Before WoW there were only a handful of MMOs and those that existed were generally very different from each other. Since WoW brought in the casual market, and dare i say.. dumbed down the genre, every game since has copied the model. Even Bioware. I'm not sure how that can be viewed as a good thing. New hotness and all that is nice, but only when its original. Mashing dynasty wars with a crpg might be original but you know what they say about oil and water. 

Yes I refer to post-WoW, which did indeed make the genre more accessible. But that's not my point, actually I think were getting ourselves confused here (I'm misunderstanding you and vice versa).

I'm not saying I want games to follow a trend or 'model' actually I'm saying the opposite, I'm saying games like DA and ME are trying to be Original! Sure, this has now warned down (since ME2 has been released) but before DA I can't recall to my memory any game being quite like it.

Same goes for the Witcher, it can't be compared to DA, it's a completely different games and goes down it's own route. That's originality. 

Modifié par MortalEngines, 29 août 2010 - 02:07 .

[Behindyounow]

Guertyras wrote...

You know, they are already doing that, no matter what what fan says , like it or not they are making it more like mass effect. Less character customization to barely non at all, tactical combat replaced by a more action oriented one. the reason is obvious, it took them way too long to produce the first dragon age, and with EA they cant afford such long development time. They have to shove a game a year down our throat.Its way faster to have one character and make the combat part a shooter/hack and slash.
Anyway the vast majority of bioware fans will be satisfied as long theres a story with cinematics, good looking guy/girl to romance, and some filler between: 6 digits sales for sure + DLCs.

So being able to change everything except last name and race is 'barely none at all'? I want some of what you're smoking.

[MortalEngines]

Behindyounow wrote...

Guertyras wrote...

You know, they are already doing that, no matter what what fan says , like it or not they are making it more like mass effect. Less character customization to barely non at all, tactical combat replaced by a more action oriented one. the reason is obvious, it took them way too long to produce the first dragon age, and with EA they cant afford such long development time. They have to shove a game a year down our throat.Its way faster to have one character and make the combat part a shooter/hack and slash.
Anyway the vast majority of bioware fans will be satisfied as long theres a story with cinematics, good looking guy/girl to romance, and some filler between: 6 digits sales for sure + DLCs.

So being able to change everything except last name and race is 'barely none at all'? I want some of what you're smoking.

Ditto, though I think he's referring to the game being Linear in some regards.

[Smorj]

You are far, far, far away from the only one. I agree completely with you and can't wait for DA2 with a gameplay worth mentioning and all the tedious parts removed. Spending hours just equipping your characters, selling crap items and so forth are so ****ing done by this time.



The gameplay in DA:O is not very rewarding from a time spent perspective. A more action-based combat with combo systems etc (like Bayonetta) is a hundred more times rewarding and it actually feels like you're getting better at the game from spending more time with it, not just better equipped.

[MAD WHITE HAM]

Rubbish Hero wrote...

If wants Mass Effect, plays Mass Effect. RPG all now console casual sit on couch press X to win.
No mores baldurs gate.

Sweet Mother of Pearl!!! Are u trying to sound like Yoda?  I mean if English isn't ur 1st language fine... but I'm sure it is because your meager attempt at talking is far below that of a foriegn speaking individual.  TALK NORMAL MCFLY!!!!!!!!  You're the reason D&D gets a bad rep

[Bubian]

Yup OP you are. If u don't like most of the qualities that make a GREAT rpg such as 'filler time quests' and levelling up, go play modern warfare, oh wait.... Even THAT gas levelling up and exp to a limited degree....

[Guertyras]

MortalEngines wrote...


Sorry but you're generalizing too much. Judging from the threads around here complaining and worrying about the implementation of some features in DA2, what you said can't be further from the truth. Most people around here want a solid RPG, not a interactive film (ala Heavy Rain), they want skill trees, engaging and challenging combat, fantastic writing, good story and lore.

You have no right to say what Bioware fans do and don't want and what they will be sastified with. Last time I checked you didn't have access to everyone's head. Also while I detest EA's influence on Bioware, I feel that Bioware has always done their best to hand out a product that suits the fanbase. Just look at the all the responses from the Bioware team themselves, alot of developers would never bother replying on forums.

And what is with everyone bashing ME as some generic shooter? Sure it's not fantastic RPG and it's not complex and mindblowing in terms of skills, but it's still a good game, I still enjoyed it. Whether or not it came up to the standards traditional RPGs. 

Why must something be a BG clone to be a good game? Every game comes under a genre, doesn't make one game harder/better/complex than another. I get annoyed when people complain that games like ME are 'dumbed down' when most RPGs aren't hard in the first place. Who are you to say this sort of stuff? 

As much as I love BG (it's better than DA in some aspects), redoing the same old formula all the time would just cause the fanbase to want a refresh, which is what the ME and DA series are trying to do. Also the dev teams for ME and DA have the same people in it (generally) so of course there are going to be similarities.

But the end of the day, DA will be DA and ME will be ME.

       About people bashing ME , you just answered your own question .
    No everything doesnt have to be a bg clone to be a good rpg, a rpg in my opinion emulate the pen and paper experience , it  could be something like fallout 1 or 2,  or arcanum , planescape, or something completely new and maybe  *gasp* more complex, instead of a violent gore action movie.It could have different ways solving quests, not just leaving a trail of dismenbered corpses.
      You mentioned it before  most rpgs arent hard, . ...Ah but i see already people running to the hills cause theres no skill trees, theres numbers text and 2D.
    I play rpg since ages, and these last years we had almost none. Let see we had dragon age, wich was excellent, a few indie games and thats all. Now dragon age 2 is an action rpg with emphasis on action., that means no more rpg anymore from main publishers, mind if we still had some instead of shooters?
   I have nothing against change, when change means adding  more gameplay ,more features, now they clearly want to do some semi interactive hollywood action movies.

[Guertyras]

Behindyounow wrote...


So being able to change everything except last name and race is 'barely none at all'? I want some of what you're smoking.

Change everything ? in mass effect 2 you can customize your look, wich doesnt change the gameplay at all, you can put some points in different gun skills , wich doesnt change the gameplay either its always duck and cover, shoot, your few skills trees made no difference at all since its all so easy anyway. Zero tactical choices,no matter what  you do with your character you cant go wrong theres no way you can fail, it will be the same, with two linear path paragon or renegade, extremely manichean paths.

[MortalEngines]

Guertyras wrote...

MortalEngines wrote...


Sorry but you're generalizing too much. Judging from the threads around here complaining and worrying about the implementation of some features in DA2, what you said can't be further from the truth. Most people around here want a solid RPG, not a interactive film (ala Heavy Rain), they want skill trees, engaging and challenging combat, fantastic writing, good story and lore.

You have no right to say what Bioware fans do and don't want and what they will be sastified with. Last time I checked you didn't have access to everyone's head. Also while I detest EA's influence on Bioware, I feel that Bioware has always done their best to hand out a product that suits the fanbase. Just look at the all the responses from the Bioware team themselves, alot of developers would never bother replying on forums.

And what is with everyone bashing ME as some generic shooter? Sure it's not fantastic RPG and it's not complex and mindblowing in terms of skills, but it's still a good game, I still enjoyed it. Whether or not it came up to the standards traditional RPGs. 

Why must something be a BG clone to be a good game? Every game comes under a genre, doesn't make one game harder/better/complex than another. I get annoyed when people complain that games like ME are 'dumbed down' when most RPGs aren't hard in the first place. Who are you to say this sort of stuff? 

As much as I love BG (it's better than DA in some aspects), redoing the same old formula all the time would just cause the fanbase to want a refresh, which is what the ME and DA series are trying to do. Also the dev teams for ME and DA have the same people in it (generally) so of course there are going to be similarities.

But the end of the day, DA will be DA and ME will be ME.

       About people bashing ME , you just answered your own question .
    No everything doesnt have to be a bg clone to be a good rpg, a rpg in my opinion emulate the pen and paper experience , it  could be something like fallout 1 or 2,  or arcanum , planescape, or something completely new and maybe  *gasp* more complex, instead of a violent gore action movie.It could have different ways solving quests, not just leaving a trail of dismenbered corpses.
      You mentioned it before  most rpgs arent hard, . ...Ah but i see already people running to the hills cause theres no skill trees, theres numbers text and 2D.
    I play rpg since ages, and these last years we had almost none. Let see we had dragon age, wich was excellent, a few indie games and thats all. Now dragon age 2 is an action rpg with emphasis on action., that means no more rpg anymore from main publishers, mind if we still had some instead of shooters?
   I have nothing against change, when change means adding  more gameplay ,more features, now they clearly want to do some semi interactive hollywood action movies.

Are you calling DA a violent gore action film?  Because then you really need to play God Of War to see what a REAL game turned gore action film is.

People don't dislike old school RPGs because they are hard per say (btw, this is from some one who plays old school RPGs). But because most of the limitations and features were outdated, why have 2d any more? That has nothing to do with difficulty, it just that people would prefer something visually easier on the eyes and why not? We have the technology for it. Number text and lack of skill tree doesn't make a game harder either, actually lack of skill tree can make a game EASIER.

If you've actually read my previous posts in this thread you'll see I'm completely against making games interactive movies (you even quoted me saying 'Most people around here want a solid RPG, not a interactive film (ala Heavy Rain)'). So please, before you assume what I'm thinking read what I've said before on the topic...

Also the emphasis on action, well I can't comment much on that till the game is out, but I think you're confusing what they mean. They want the combat to run more smoothly and have more of an impact, many people complain that combat in DA:O was boring and slow (which is kinda right) and so Bioware is rectifying this by making things a bit more fast pace. It has nothing to do with the RPG elements in the game, last I remember it's still in 3rd person, uses skill trees, spells, inventory management, mircomanaging, focuses on story and doesn't feature guns, so how you can call it a shooter is completely beyond me.

Modifié par MortalEngines, 29 août 2010 - 02:43 .

[Spartansfan8888]

I don't mind speeding up the combat a bit but I really hope there are still tactical components to it. In DAO your own skill didn't really matter as much as much as how you built your character and what tactics you used during battle; it was all about planning and execution and you didn't have to be skilled at shooting an arrow of slaying you just issued the order. While I don't want a super fast combat like Bayonetta it would be nice to have to incorporate skill as well as character building and actual battle plans to take down foes.

[Vandrayke]

Spartansfan8888 wrote...

I don't mind speeding up the combat a bit but I really hope there are still tactical components to it. In DAO your own skill didn't really matter as much as much as how you built your character and what tactics you used during battle; it was all about planning and execution and you didn't have to be skilled at shooting an arrow of slaying you just issued the order. While I don't want a super fast combat like Bayonetta it would be nice to have to incorporate skill as well as character building and actual battle plans to take down foes.

I totally agree.  I don't think that increasing the visceral appeal of combat has to mean that you punt tactics.  I think you can do both, which would be really cool.  

[Torhagen]

An RPG is a sophisticated Plot and interesting Story, Character development with talents which have a impact of how you play the game,some kind of an inventory system take "the Witcher" as a example for a good streamlined inventory and last but not least loot where i think considering Loot Diablo is most prominent for where people would play the same part in different difficulties "just" to get that better item



The Witcher and Diablo are both RPG very different in Playstyle bot easily identifiable as RPG's

[Mike2640]

MortalEngines wrote...

Yes I refer to post-WoW, which did indeed make the genre more accessible. But that's not my point, actually I think were getting ourselves confused here (I'm misunderstanding you and vice versa).

I'm not saying I want games to follow a trend or 'model' actually I'm saying the opposite, I'm saying games like DA and ME are trying to be Original! Sure, this has now warned down (since ME2 has been released) but before DA I can't recall to my memory any game being quite like it.

Same goes for the Witcher, it can't be compared to DA, it's a completely different games and goes down it's own route. That's originality. 

Mass Effect was original (arguably). Mass Effect 2 was a third person shooter with a tacked-on skills system with the depth of a kiddy pool. Skills didn't
matter and only made the shooty bits (Of which there were far to many)
faster. Originality was the last thing they were thinking of with ME2.

Also in regards to Woodey's FPS line, I believe he's saying what a lot of people have been saying throughout this thread. That there are a ****-ton of shooty action games out there and by tacking on a sub-par skill system onto a TPS like ME2 did and calling it an RPG simply dillutes the genre and brings nothing good to the table.

Someone on this board made the comment that all RPG elements are meant to hold up the story and characters first and foremost. If something else becomes more important gameplay-wise it ceases to be an RPG. In ME2 the combat took precedence over everything else.
ME2 was not an RPG. It was a TPS with a very good story (In comparision to other TPSs) and some skills.

Modifié par Mike2640, 29 août 2010 - 04:12 .