925 réponses à ce sujet

[wowpwnslol]

Lusitanum wrote...


It's our desire to actually think that makes us want DA2 to be more like the ME2. I mean, say what you want about shooters, at least in ME2 I wasn't bored to tears from having to do do the same thing over and over again everytime I fought any monster in the game. From deepstalkers to the bosses, EVERY - SINGLE - FIGHT in the whole damned game was solved in the exact same way: one tank, one DPS dealer, one support Rogue that is more useful to open locked crap than anything else, and my mage just bombarding the enemy with the same spells until everything is killed.

That's because you have no imagination and are probably bad at the game so you MUST play it this way. Play solo. Play solo mage with no arcane warrior. Play unorthodox group set up. I guarantee there is a lot of depth when you have to THINK about encounters. What thinking is there in ME2? Shoot, shoot... oh it's not dead because the difficulty is set to insane... I guess I'll shoot some more.

It's boring. It's shallow. My brain goes numb from never having to actually have to think on what I should do to adapat to new situations because I never need to adapt. I just need to use the most generic of MMORPG tactics and there you go, the game's already won for you right from the start.

You never need to adapt because you're too stupid to realize how deep and entertaining DA had potential to be. You didn't need to use MMO tactics. There are a ton of things you could do to make the game fun, which can't be said for ME2.

Oh, and every once in a while you have to go back and sell your crap. Because, you know, that's so mentally stimulating I can almost feel my brain cells shrivel and die due to the lack of interesst on doing what feels like a formality of clearing my inventory of crap that I don't need.

God forbid there is some sort of a pause to interrupt brainless action scenes.

On the other hand, ME2 had different enemies, all with their strengths, weaknesses and approaches to combat which forced to adapt your equipment and party members according to the situation you had to face. Using the same squadmates through the whole game means that you'll end up facing situations that you won't be able to beat because they're just not cut up for the job. On the other hand, doing the same thing in DA1, means nothing, if you've beaten a Darkspawn with a given party, you can beat everything else.

LOL. Adapting in ME2? ME2 is a brainless shooter with RPG elements. There was no adapting. Just shooting more depending on the difficulty you chose.

But hey, ME is a shooter, so I guess it's alright to just lump it up with "the Hal0z" and Modern Warfare so you don't have to actually come up with an intelligent retort. Who's lacking the desire to think now?

YEs, ME2 is a shooter, dumbed down for stupid console action oriented kids, who are trying to ruin DA2 with their garbage suggestions.

[SirOccam]

I enjoy the idea of someone called "wowpwnslol" trying to insinuate that some people aren't as sophisticated as he is.

[DMC12]

I'm for  "Mass Effectifying" DA, and yet I'm against it as well. The Mass Effect series is pretty damn good with the innovations to the addition of voice, the dialouge tree, cinematic additions, and certain streamlined aspects, like the combining of skill points and abilities, and I liked the upgrade system in ME2 with the weapons and armor.

But when it comes to DA, the dialouge, voice acting, and cinematics all make sense to implement, but certain "Mass Effect"attributes just don't make sense to put into the game. In Mass Effect, it made sense that you would pretty much need one set of armor and upgrade it, because you're an elite bad*** from the very beginning of the genre, and it doesn't make sense that you would find high tech armor that's vastly superior to your own military grade equipment in a strip club bathroom.

As for the argument going around about how much DA is going to be as action oriented as ME or if it's going to be a TPS, it's just absolutely ridiculous as I feel that the description of the demos/game itself gives a clear definition of what it'd be like. Yeah, DA2 is more action oriented, but isn't a bad thing. To me, it's going to play like DA:O, but instead of say, shuffling around like a fat guy with a huge wedgie as I'm trying to hit a guy, I can kick his ass right then and there, then move on to the next guy. So exactly like Origins, except you get more cool visuals and the combat is more streamlined with the lack of frustration that came with the first game.

[HarryThePlotter]

SirOccam wrote...

I enjoy the idea of someone called "wowpwnslol" trying to insinuate that some people aren't as sophisticated as he is.

He is Conflicted. He likes DA:O but dislikes ME1/2.

[Ziggy]

Mass effect 2 was too much about making they player feel oh so tough and badassy, all the characters were only self interested and there were no moral dilemmas or anything you needed your brain for.



The only part of dragon age I hope they masseffectify is the graphics, otherwise please don't!

[archtitan]

Do not mass effectify it, it just ruin the game.



However, as much as I like dragon age, I really hate some RPG element that I hope will be taken away in DA2.



For example, inventory space. In my 1st playthrough I don't know that you can buy backpacks for a much cheaper price at xxx, so for the next few quests I was screwed having to limit the stuff I can pick and wasting time running back to vendor to sell. Boring.



I do not like completing side quests with no meaning at all, like delivering letters and running around killing small fries and such. If there is no thought in developing the side quest, rather not make them. Interesting side quests add to the gameplay, repetitive and boring ones subtract.



And becoming a trash collector just to earn more money makes it so cheap.

[Lusitanum]

[quote]Sylvius the Mad wrote...

[quote]Lusitanum wrote...

[quote]Sylvius the Mad wrote...

[quote]Lusitanum wrote...

Oh,so there's no distinction between roleplaying games and real life for you.[/quote]

Of course not.  In real life, decisions get made to benefit me from my point of view.

In an RPG, the decisions are made to benefit my character from his point of view.

There's no difference at all.[/quote]

Wow, that's one seriously messed up mind right there... [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/surprised.png[/smilie][/quote]

It makes perfect sense that the character makes decisions for himself.  Doesn't your character do that?[/quote]

How much of this conversation if just flying over your head, btw?

[quote]Morroian wrote...

The fact that you can beat the game with certain tactics doesn't mean you have to use them. I found it fairly easy as
well once past the initial getting to know it phase and once realising how to program the tactics screen, but still had to change tactics for some fights like the corrupted spider queen. [/quote]

I honestly didn't. Besides the fact that the spider is one of those annoying "paralyze and run away" bosses, I wouldn't even call that a challenge if all I ever have to do stand there waiting for the effect to wear off before I can proceed to keep bashing her head in.

But if you enjoyed that fight, then (with all honesty) good for you. I'm glad someone got some enjoyment out of that.

[quote]Morroian wrote...

As for ME2 I've only played ME but if its the same ie. your control over your squad is limited then I wouldn't call it
tactical. Yes it requires some thought and to use cover but still not all that tactical.
[/quote]

No, ME1 was also quite brainless at times. It suffered from the same "one tactic for the whole game" syndrome where pretty much every single group you fought behaved the same way and what worked for one group worked for the next. And by the time you got Immunity, you could pretty much just charge blindy into enemy fire with a shotgun, not caring if your squadmates lived or died, and still beat the game. I know, I did that.

ME2 got rid of that by removing the obscene amout of resistante for enemy fire (even a Soldier dies if he stays more than a few seconds under fire) and introducing enemies with different kinds of abilities, weapons and defences that forces you to bring in the appropriate squad mates to tackle a specific kind enemy. And the universal cooldown for powers means that it's not like DA where you just keep spamming the same spells over and over in a never-ending cycle until the fight is done.

[quote]wowpwnslol wrote...

That's because you have no imagination and are probably bad at the game so you MUST play it this way. Play solo. Play solo mage with no arcane warrior. Play unorthodox group set up. I guarantee there is a lot of depth when you have to THINK about encounters. What thinking is there in ME2? Shoot, shoot... oh it's not dead because the difficulty is set to insane... I guess I'll shoot some more.[/quote]

Oh yes, that's a great idea: it's not like the game is bland, generic and extremely easy. No you're just not restricting yourself enough. Play solo. Play with no Poltices. Just use your starting equipment. Don't use any Materia. Try going for a IENANENPANLBCMO challenge. If you don't, then it's because you suck at the game. Even if you can beat it on Nightmare and still find it boring, you're still terrible. L2P n00b!

[quote]wowpwnslol wrote...

You never need to adapt because you're too stupid to realize how deep and entertaining DA had potential to be. You didn't need to use MMO tactics. There are a ton of things you could do to make the game fun, which can't be said for ME2.[/quote]

No, I don't need to, but using other tactics won't make the game any more challenging, it'll just drag it on for longer. Unless you're also going to suggest a No-Weapons playthrough or something similar, while you're at it.

[quote]wowpwnslol wrote...

God forbid there is some sort of a pause to interrupt brainless action scenes.[/quote]

Well, in DAI wouldn't call it a "pause" if it's as brainless as the combat. It's just a continuation of the boredom.

[quote]wowpwnslol wrote...

LOL. Adapting in ME2? ME2 is a brainless shooter with RPG elements. There was no adapting. Just shooting more depending on the difficulty you chose.[/quote]

Yeah, I'm betting that you never actually played ME2. Otherwise you would have noticed that the game has different kinds of enemies, each with their own weapons, approaches to combat and layers of protection. Blood Pack members have Armor and regenerating health, so you need Warp and Fire powers while you keep as much distance as possibly from their flamethrowers and shotgun-wielding Krogans. Blue Suns have Shields and mechs, so Overload and Disruptor ammo helps a lot and there might be some use to AI Hacking.

Compare that to DA, where regardless of wheter or not you're fighting elves, dwarves, deepstalkers, darkspawn or the freaking Archdemon, you just need to use the same party with the same spells that you've used since the very beggining of the game, and you might see the differences. If you actually used your brain for more than just typing thoughtless generalizations.

[quote]wowpwnslol wrote...

YEs, ME2 is a shooter, dumbed down for stupid console action oriented kids, who are trying to ruin DA2 with their garbage suggestions.[/quote]

So, let's try to run them all down:

• "The game is dumbed down" claim? Check.
• Insult the other side of the discussion by calling them all stupid/idiots/******? Check.
• Bring in the the "kids" argument? Check.
• "They" are the blight of our game? Check.
• No actual valid arguments to support the claims beyond broad generalizations? Check.
• It's all the "Hal0z" fault? Well... no, actually we're missing that one. That's surprising

Basically, all the signs of some forum troll with no actual idea of what to say, so he just resorts to the most basics. Are you still expecting us to take anything you say seriously after this? And also after the whole "just play the game with your feet while pulling hair out of your nose, you n00b"?

In fact, HarryThePlotter and SirOccam already said it all:

[quote]HarryThePlotter wrote...

[quote]SirOccam wrote...

I enjoy the idea of someone called "wowpwnslol" trying to insinuate that some people aren't as sophisticated as he is.[/quote]

He is Conflicted. He likes DA:O but dislikes ME1/2. [/quote]

There you go .

Modifié par Lusitanum, 03 septembre 2010 - 11:26 .

[Kilshrek]

Sorry fellas, but how much of this is relevant to DA 2?



Hopefully PAX will give us some PC gameplay videos, sans click-to-attack mode.



In trying to drive this back to DA 2 relevance, ME has nothing that DA needs, and vice versa. DA 2 should be fine with the inventory retained, spells/skills mostly intact, aside from the 'amped up' action, which has yet to be showcased for the PC.



I'll only ever buy the PC version, so excuse me if my ramblings are PC-centric, but DAO needed little fixing as it was.



ME 2 was slightly annoying in that ammo varieties were forced into 'abilities' when such a move was totally unnecessary, as was the total removal of the inventory system. Just as arrow/bolt types will have relevance in DA games, ammo types should be an inventory item and free to be swapped out according to the situation, rather than be forced as abilities, leaving classes like the soldier with next to nothing to choose from.



Hopefully DA 2 will not implement such radical changes, with the archery skill tree implementing 'arrow/bolt' types as abilities rather than inventory items.



Another concern of mine is the reduction of total spells in favour of 'upgradable' spells, which has to some degree been lessened by certain devs mentioning that there aren't a significantly lesser number of spells, but having them upgradable between "larger AoE or more damage" just seems to be unnecessary, again, quite like the top tier abilities in ME 2.

[FlintlockJazz]

Lusitanum wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...

God no, we already have plenty of
TPS, they should go the other way and run the game exactly like BG, in
isometric view all the time!

Because as we all know, quality and depth are all about what kind of camera you have and wheter or not you have swords instead of guns!

Damn right, the essence of all good games is the camera angle!   Applies to life too!

[MerinTB]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

As for the overall point, I kind of agree that DAO combat wasn't all that deep. But I'm not really sold on ME2 being deep either. Then again, I can't remember a commercial RPG with really hard-to-solve combat.

Wizard's Crown.

Or is that too early to be a "commercial RPG"?

Yay, a Wizard's Crown shout-out! 


I don't know what people want from "deep combat" and how DA:O wasn't it, but honestly the "hit a button something happens" isn't going to make it deeper.

[HTTP 404]

shootist70 wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...


Guess what I kind of agree with the OP.    rpg "elements" are really subjective.  When I played pencil and paper RPG we didnt concern ourselves with items, loot, etc but created very good stories.

This guy gets it.

Compelling plot, characters and story > intrinsic reward based, rat maze gameplay everytime.

Thanks! but each to their own I guess

[HTTP 404]

From what I played it would be more accurate to say they Jade Empire-ified Dragon Age.

[Kilshrek]

HTTP 404 wrote...

From what I played it would be more accurate to say they Jade Empire-ified Dragon Age.

Oh dear.....


Surely this was the Gamescom demo?

I think they said there was a problem with the attack order, but overall how did the combat feel  like?

Modifié par Kilshrek, 03 septembre 2010 - 02:23 .

[HTTP 404]

Kilshrek wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

From what I played it would be more accurate to say they Jade Empire-ified Dragon Age.

Oh dear.....


Surely this was the Gamescom demo?

I think they said there was a problem with the attack order, but overall how did the combat feel  like?

I tested it at Comic Con.

The controls are still DA.  The combat felt like Jade Empire in a way that is responsive and chereography of the moves.  But showed much more depth than Jade Empire where you still had the 6 quick options to choose from (console) like Dragon Age which had the same tactic wheel, etc.  The combat and art reminds me of Jade Empire.  I heard, correct me if im wrong, that the lead Art was the same guy from Jade Empire.  Just play some Jade Empire, its the same feel, responsiveness as DA2 will be. 

Its not really a bad thing to implement, just curious to see what inventory looks like and the amount of skills available to choose from.  That, I couldnt see during the playtest.

[Kilshrek]

HTTP 404 wrote...

I tested it at Comic Con.

The controls are still DA.  The combat felt like Jade Empire in a way that is responsive and chereography of the moves.  But showed much more depth than Jade Empire where you still had the 6 quick options to choose from (console) like Dragon Age which had the same tactic wheel, etc.  The combat and art reminds me of Jade Empire.  I heard, correct me if im wrong, that the lead Art was the same guy from Jade Empire.  Just play some Jade Empire, its the same feel, responsiveness as DA2 will be. 

Its not really a bad thing to implement, just curious to see what inventory looks like and the amount of skills available to choose from.  That, I couldnt see during the playtest.

Haven't played JE in many, many moons.. Don't even know where I've placed it now..

But... In regards to how quick it will be, JE was more arcadey quick, but you report the console version, so I'm still holding out hope for the PC version.

Some weeks ago we were told the inventory is there, but what changes have happened to it, we don't know yet... Hopefully not 'streamlined' like ME 2... <_<

[Hollingdale]

wowpwnslol wrote...

Lusitanum wrote...


It's our desire to actually think that makes us want DA2 to be more like the ME2. I mean, say what you want about shooters, at least in ME2 I wasn't bored to tears from having to do do the same thing over and over again everytime I fought any monster in the game. From deepstalkers to the bosses, EVERY - SINGLE - FIGHT in the whole damned game was solved in the exact same way: one tank, one DPS dealer, one support Rogue that is more useful to open locked crap than anything else, and my mage just bombarding the enemy with the same spells until everything is killed.

That's because you have no imagination and are probably bad at the game so you MUST play it this way. Play solo. Play solo mage with no arcane warrior. Play unorthodox group set up. I guarantee there is a lot of depth when you have to THINK about encounters. What thinking is there in ME2? Shoot, shoot... oh it's not dead because the difficulty is set to insane... I guess I'll shoot some more.

It's boring. It's shallow. My brain goes numb from never having to actually have to think on what I should do to adapat to new situations because I never need to adapt. I just need to use the most generic of MMORPG tactics and there you go, the game's already won for you right from the start.

You never need to adapt because you're too stupid to realize how deep and entertaining DA had potential to be. You didn't need to use MMO tactics. There are a ton of things you could do to make the game fun, which can't be said for ME2.

Oh, and every once in a while you have to go back and sell your crap. Because, you know, that's so mentally stimulating I can almost feel my brain cells shrivel and die due to the lack of interesst on doing what feels like a formality of clearing my inventory of crap that I don't need.

God forbid there is some sort of a pause to interrupt brainless action scenes.

On the other hand, ME2 had different enemies, all with their strengths, weaknesses and approaches to combat which forced to adapt your equipment and party members according to the situation you had to face. Using the same squadmates through the whole game means that you'll end up facing situations that you won't be able to beat because they're just not cut up for the job. On the other hand, doing the same thing in DA1, means nothing, if you've beaten a Darkspawn with a given party, you can beat everything else.

LOL. Adapting in ME2? ME2 is a brainless shooter with RPG elements. There was no adapting. Just shooting more depending on the difficulty you chose.

But hey, ME is a shooter, so I guess it's alright to just lump it up with "the Hal0z" and Modern Warfare so you don't have to actually come up with an intelligent retort. Who's lacking the desire to think now?

YEs, ME2 is a shooter, dumbed down for stupid console action oriented kids, who are trying to ruin DA2 with their garbage suggestions.

GTFO

[triggerhappy456]

All the hate for mass effect on the dragon age forums and vice versa makes me wonder if I am really weird to have actually really enjoyed them both
Back to the OP, there are certain elements from the Mass Effect series which i think would make the series better, such as putting in fewer armours and weapons, so that we are not carrying around hundreds which we are going to have to spend time selling. But the series has already moved torwards Mass efefct with the vO and the dialogue wheel, and since they are both great series, it would be fine to leave it at that

[Mehow_pwn]

Hollingdale wrote...

wowpwnslol wrote...

Lusitanum wrote...


It's our desire to actually think that makes us want DA2 to be more like the ME2. I mean, say what you want about shooters, at least in ME2 I wasn't bored to tears from having to do do the same thing over and over again everytime I fought any monster in the game. From deepstalkers to the bosses, EVERY - SINGLE - FIGHT in the whole damned game was solved in the exact same way: one tank, one DPS dealer, one support Rogue that is more useful to open locked crap than anything else, and my mage just bombarding the enemy with the same spells until everything is killed.

That's because you have no imagination and are probably bad at the game so you MUST play it this way. Play solo. Play solo mage with no arcane warrior. Play unorthodox group set up. I guarantee there is a lot of depth when you have to THINK about encounters. What thinking is there in ME2? Shoot, shoot... oh it's not dead because the difficulty is set to insane... I guess I'll shoot some more.

It's boring. It's shallow. My brain goes numb from never having to actually have to think on what I should do to adapat to new situations because I never need to adapt. I just need to use the most generic of MMORPG tactics and there you go, the game's already won for you right from the start.

You never need to adapt because you're too stupid to realize how deep and entertaining DA had potential to be. You didn't need to use MMO tactics. There are a ton of things you could do to make the game fun, which can't be said for ME2.

Oh, and every once in a while you have to go back and sell your crap. Because, you know, that's so mentally stimulating I can almost feel my brain cells shrivel and die due to the lack of interesst on doing what feels like a formality of clearing my inventory of crap that I don't need.

God forbid there is some sort of a pause to interrupt brainless action scenes.

On the other hand, ME2 had different enemies, all with their strengths, weaknesses and approaches to combat which forced to adapt your equipment and party members according to the situation you had to face. Using the same squadmates through the whole game means that you'll end up facing situations that you won't be able to beat because they're just not cut up for the job. On the other hand, doing the same thing in DA1, means nothing, if you've beaten a Darkspawn with a given party, you can beat everything else.

LOL. Adapting in ME2? ME2 is a brainless shooter with RPG elements. There was no adapting. Just shooting more depending on the difficulty you chose.

But hey, ME is a shooter, so I guess it's alright to just lump it up with "the Hal0z" and Modern Warfare so you don't have to actually come up with an intelligent retort. Who's lacking the desire to think now?

YEs, ME2 is a shooter, dumbed down for stupid console action oriented kids, who are trying to ruin DA2 with their garbage suggestions.

GTFO

You can go GTFO console ****.... let the man speak becaues clearly you dont have computer nor both the consoles..

Modifié par Mehow_pwn, 03 septembre 2010 - 04:37 .

[SellaraAB]

What mass effect did works for mass effect. I think everything about the ME changes worked out and I bet most people here consider ME2 to probably be the best game they've ever played. Problem is, Dragon age was not a game that tried and failed to be an action game like ME1 did (I loved ME1 but the combat did suck). DA is a strategy/rpg and changing it into a fast paced hack and slash would be the reverse of ME1 to ME2 they'd be taking a great idea down a step instead of evolving it. Part of what they are doing sounds promising. More responsive movement and impressive skills in combat and more of a hard separation between warriors and rogues added to a pause and play strategy rpg should equal brilliance. Taking inventory out and poor decisions like that though are just terrible ideas. One last thought, if they are going to delineate the console and PC version in terms of difficulty again, at least put the option on consoles to make it as hard as PC. Beating DAO on nightmare on my xbox is, really, much too easy.

Modifié par SellaraAB, 03 septembre 2010 - 05:26 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Lusitanum wrote...

How much of this conversation if just flying over your head, btw?

If any of it is then you're not expressing yourself well.

[Sylvius the Mad]

MerinTB wrote...

Yay, a Wizard's Crown shout-out! 

I don't know what people want from "deep combat" and how DA:O wasn't it, but honestly the "hit a button something happens" isn't going to make it deeper.

I'd love more tactical complexity (like Wizard's Crown), but then the game would either be quite a bit more difficult, or quite a bit more difficult to balance.

[In Exile]

Morroian wrote...
The fact that you can beat the game with certain tactics doesn't mean you have to use them. I found it fairly easy as well once past the initial getting to know it phase and once realising how to program the tactics screen, but still had to change tactics for some fights like the corrupted spider queen.

Certainly not, but if the entire game is vulnerable to one particular set of builds and tactics, that is sufficient to say that the game is not tactical, at least IMO. I suppose that for some people there is a great deal of fun in using suboptimal builds and then having to work their way around them, but to me that is akin to saying that a game with poor gameplay (say terrible camera angles) is tactical because you have to work around that.

[In Exile]

wowpwnslol wrote...
That's because you have no imagination and are probably bad at the game so you MUST play it this way. Play solo. Play solo mage with no arcane warrior. Play unorthodox group set up. I guarantee there is a lot of depth when you have to THINK about encounters. What thinking is there in ME2? Shoot, shoot... oh it's not dead because the difficulty is set to insane... I guess I'll shoot some more.

Ah, you mean gimp yourself. Okay, then play ME2 without shooting - powers only + companions. Play ME2 without buying any upgrades, using base weapons, and turning party powers off.

There is a lot of depth to THINK about encounters if you're running stupid suboptimal builds entirely for the sake of gimping yourself. You can do this in any game. This does not make DA tactical; it makes you a gluton for punishment.

You never need to adapt because you're too stupid to realize how deep and entertaining DA had potential to be. You didn't need to use MMO tactics. There are a ton of things you could do to make the game fun, which can't be said for ME2.

It's good that we have your wisdom to save us. The exact same thing can be said for ME2 - create artificial challenges that involve much greater difficulty in any encounter on any difficulty. You happen to think that this state somehow makes DA special. Good for you.

LOL. Adapting in ME2? ME2 is a brainless shooter with RPG elements. There was no adapting. Just shooting more depending on the difficulty you chose.

Like in DA - more spell spamming depending on the difficulty you choose. Unless you pick a gimp build, like no offensive spells. In which case it's entirely like a no-guns ME2 playthrough.]

[Altima Darkspells]

A lot of the ****ing about the inventory and lotting in DAO could (and should) be solved by simply making most of the best items found via quests or optional bosses, such as it was in BG2. Instead, BioWare put the 'best' items in stores selling for such high prices that you can--maybe--afford two or three through your whole playthrough, assuming you buy little to nothing else (or cheat/bug exploit).



Of course, strangely enough, the DLC comes with powerful items, and the later DLC simply adds it to your inventory at game start and doesn't even bother to have you quest for it. But I'm sure it's totally unrelated. Yeap. And one of the items from the golem DLC sells for hundreds of gold, doesn't it?