925 réponses à ce sujet

[Dreadstruck]

Wyndham711 wrote...

One of the core things I enjoy in RPGs is the fact that not every moment is intense or enticing. I relish the slow, "dull" moments of inventory management, vendoring and running around from one questgiver to another. These mellow parts award the gameplay a calming feeling of respiration. Every now and then a battle ensues and the excitement level increases - you really get to appreciate the intense moments (since they can't be taken for granted when the whole game is not constant excitement) and similarly be glad of the peaceful "fluff".

Also, the slow gameplay increases the actual length of the games. A game made solely of intense gameplay is bound to be short and exhausting. I much prefer a LONG game with a lot of meandering, mellow moments spiced up with action.

*gives kudos*

Yesh! I couldn't have described it better with my sucky english grammar skills!

[zahra]

Arrtis wrote...

zahra wrote...


You are obviously in the minority OP, but other than the reasons that have been stated by previous posters, streamlining inventory would really be weird since a few things accomplished in ME2 was acceptable due to it being a sci-fi fantasy, (example: customization of armor) while I don't quite know how you would implement that into a sword and shield world.

If you don't like the inventory system/selling loot, don't use it. Rely on the money from side-quests or something. As someone said in a previous post, no one is forcing you to loot the genlocks for vases and blank vellums.

You simply go to an armorer and get your armor repaired/improved?
I am thinking of AC2....
Also they force you to loot genlocks/hurlocks for blood.

Urm, you only had to get blood from genlocks "Once". And would you really be okay with wearing the same armor throughout the whole game just in slightly different color variations/accessories? Because this is what ME 2 did and I found that factor to be especially sucky.

[Arrtis]

I rather they slow the game down with cut scenes rather than a lot of inventory management.

[Arrtis]

zahra wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

zahra wrote...


You are obviously in the minority OP, but other than the reasons that have been stated by previous posters, streamlining inventory would really be weird since a few things accomplished in ME2 was acceptable due to it being a sci-fi fantasy, (example: customization of armor) while I don't quite know how you would implement that into a sword and shield world.

If you don't like the inventory system/selling loot, don't use it. Rely on the money from side-quests or something. As someone said in a previous post, no one is forcing you to loot the genlocks for vases and blank vellums.

You simply go to an armorer and get your armor repaired/improved?
I am thinking of AC2....
Also they force you to loot genlocks/hurlocks for blood.

Urm, you only had to get blood from genlocks "Once". And would you really be okay with wearing the same armor throughout the whole game just in slightly different color variations/accessories? Because this is what ME 2 did and I found that factor to be especially sucky.

You can change how the armor looks entriely with an *improvement*.SImply make it so you have a very large selection....but the selection is at the store and not in your bags.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

SirOccam wrote...

fanman72 wrote...

 Let's be honest here - a lot of elements from  traditional RPGs are really unncessary and don't add to the overall experience of playing a video game.  The strengths of many RPGs - storyline, characters, etc. is something I don't think bioware will be skimping out on anytime soon.  Now don't get me wrong, the combat in DA was fun but was overall it wasn't the greatest gameplay experience in the world.  The storyline, mood/atmosphere, and memorable characters more than made up for what I perceived to be technical gameplay shortcomings.  Mass Effect 1 had similar issues, most of which were fixed in ME2.  No I dont' care about dealing with a clunky inventory as long as i can alter my character's equipment's appearance.  No I don't care about dealing with inventory weight.  No I don't care about leveling up.  No I don't care about spending half of my time travelling to different places back and forth for "fetch this" type quests (what I call filler time).  

Keep the characters, story, plot, visuals, graphics etc interesting.  Those are the only elements i really care from an RPG.  Then for all I care it can play like Dragon Effect 2.

No, you are NOT the only one! I think everything you said hits the nail on the head.

But speaking from experience, you are not going to win many fans by promoting things like these (as it looks like you are no doubt finding out right at this moment). I got caught up in quite the sh*tstorm when I decided to express my views on what my idea of a "perfect game" would look like.

Apparently "tedium" is one traditional pillar of RPGs that most people are simply unwilling to let go.

If someone ever did make a game without all that stuff, there are two confirmed sales right here, eh?

*fistbump* Stay strong.

Edit: I wouldn't call it "mass effectification" though, unless by that you mean the changes ME2 had in relation to ME1. The same types of changes I would love in DA2, but obviously I don't want DA2 to actually start looking like Mass Effect.

Might want to get some medication for that ADD you seem to have. BOOM BOOM  EXPLOSIONS PRETTY! Press x to win teh game!

[zahra]

Arrtis wrote...

zahra wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

zahra wrote...


You are obviously in the minority OP, but other than the reasons that have been stated by previous posters, streamlining inventory would really be weird since a few things accomplished in ME2 was acceptable due to it being a sci-fi fantasy, (example: customization of armor) while I don't quite know how you would implement that into a sword and shield world.

If you don't like the inventory system/selling loot, don't use it. Rely on the money from side-quests or something. As someone said in a previous post, no one is forcing you to loot the genlocks for vases and blank vellums.

You simply go to an armorer and get your armor repaired/improved?
I am thinking of AC2....
Also they force you to loot genlocks/hurlocks for blood.

Urm, you only had to get blood from genlocks "Once". And would you really be okay with wearing the same armor throughout the whole game just in slightly different color variations/accessories? Because this is what ME 2 did and I found that factor to be especially sucky.

You can change how the armor looks entriely with an *improvement*.SImply make it so you have a very large selection....but the selection is at the store and not in your bags.

Urm, I don't think that aesthetically, there was much difference between the "improvements". But thats just how I looked at it, plus I am biased because I absolutely hated the overall look of the new armor on Femshep. 

[Torhagen]

Arrtis wrote...

zahra wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

zahra wrote...


You are obviously in the minority OP, but other than the reasons that have been stated by previous posters, streamlining inventory would really be weird since a few things accomplished in ME2 was acceptable due to it being a sci-fi fantasy, (example: customization of armor) while I don't quite know how you would implement that into a sword and shield world.

If you don't like the inventory system/selling loot, don't use it. Rely on the money from side-quests or something. As someone said in a previous post, no one is forcing you to loot the genlocks for vases and blank vellums.

You simply go to an armorer and get your armor repaired/improved?
I am thinking of AC2....
Also they force you to loot genlocks/hurlocks for blood.

Urm, you only had to get blood from genlocks "Once". And would you really be okay with wearing the same armor throughout the whole game just in slightly different color variations/accessories? Because this is what ME 2 did and I found that factor to be especially sucky.

You can change how the armor looks entriely with an *improvement*.SImply make it so you have a very large selection....but the selection is at the store and not in your bags.

so if it is"ME2 like" you would have some Armor that you can not change at all because its a "done deal" and one type armor where you can switch parts and change color but still is kinda the same.
and you get about 3 weapons per type and everyone get the same choice of weapons not matter origin and race
Since you dont want to be bored by too many choices right [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]

[Wyndham711]

Arrtis wrote...

I rather they slow the game down with cut scenes rather than a lot of inventory management.

The thing is, cutscenes typically aren't "slow". In BioWare's games they tend to often be much more important than (and at least as attention demanding as) the minute to minute action gameplay. You simply can't let your mind wander during dialogue or cutscenes, since they are so crucially important in terms of story progression, character development etc. I personally feel the need of something calming and slow (=inventory management, vendoring etc.) to break up the intense parts of the gameplay and the crucial cutscenes.

[Arrtis]

zahra wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

zahra wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

zahra wrote...


You are obviously in the minority OP, but other than the reasons that have been stated by previous posters, streamlining inventory would really be weird since a few things accomplished in ME2 was acceptable due to it being a sci-fi fantasy, (example: customization of armor) while I don't quite know how you would implement that into a sword and shield world.

If you don't like the inventory system/selling loot, don't use it. Rely on the money from side-quests or something. As someone said in a previous post, no one is forcing you to loot the genlocks for vases and blank vellums.

You simply go to an armorer and get your armor repaired/improved?
I am thinking of AC2....
Also they force you to loot genlocks/hurlocks for blood.

Urm, you only had to get blood from genlocks "Once". And would you really be okay with wearing the same armor throughout the whole game just in slightly different color variations/accessories? Because this is what ME 2 did and I found that factor to be especially sucky.

You can change how the armor looks entriely with an *improvement*.SImply make it so you have a very large selection....but the selection is at the store and not in your bags.

Urm, I don't think that aesthetically, there was much difference between the "improvements". But thats just how I looked at it, plus I am biased because I absolutely hated the overall look of the new armor on Femshep. 

WEll....IF the armor looks better...then it is an improvement.Heck seperate it into to categories.

[Arrtis]

Wyndham711 wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

I rather they slow the game down with cut scenes rather than a lot of inventory management.

The thing is, cutscenes typically aren't "slow". In BioWare's games they tend to often be much more important than (and at least as attention demanding as) the minute to minute action gameplay. You simply can't let your mind wander during dialogue or cutscenes, since they are so crucially important in terms of story progression, character development etc. I personally feel the need of something calming and slow (=inventory management, vendoring etc.) to break up the intense parts of the gameplay and the crucial cutscenes.

Liek a cutscene where you look at your character enter an area...?
Like in lothering after the bandits you get a veiw of lothering before you start talking.Make it longer and show off the town?

[SirOccam]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

fanman72 wrote...

 Let's be honest here - a lot of elements from  traditional RPGs are really unncessary and don't add to the overall experience of playing a video game.  The strengths of many RPGs - storyline, characters, etc. is something I don't think bioware will be skimping out on anytime soon.  Now don't get me wrong, the combat in DA was fun but was overall it wasn't the greatest gameplay experience in the world.  The storyline, mood/atmosphere, and memorable characters more than made up for what I perceived to be technical gameplay shortcomings.  Mass Effect 1 had similar issues, most of which were fixed in ME2.  No I dont' care about dealing with a clunky inventory as long as i can alter my character's equipment's appearance.  No I don't care about dealing with inventory weight.  No I don't care about leveling up.  No I don't care about spending half of my time travelling to different places back and forth for "fetch this" type quests (what I call filler time).  

Keep the characters, story, plot, visuals, graphics etc interesting.  Those are the only elements i really care from an RPG.  Then for all I care it can play like Dragon Effect 2.

No, you are NOT the only one! I think everything you said hits the nail on the head.

But speaking from experience, you are not going to win many fans by promoting things like these (as it looks like you are no doubt finding out right at this moment). I got caught up in quite the sh*tstorm when I decided to express my views on what my idea of a "perfect game" would look like.

Apparently "tedium" is one traditional pillar of RPGs that most people are simply unwilling to let go.

If someone ever did make a game without all that stuff, there are two confirmed sales right here, eh?

*fistbump* Stay strong.

Edit: I wouldn't call it "mass effectification" though, unless by that you mean the changes ME2 had in relation to ME1. The same types of changes I would love in DA2, but obviously I don't want DA2 to actually start looking like Mass Effect.

Might want to get some medication for that ADD you seem to have. BOOM BOOM  EXPLOSIONS PRETTY! Press x to win teh game!

Thanks for your input. You are a true scholar.

[Onyx Jaguar]

I wonder what will be thrown around in 10 years when ADD stops being a catch phrase.



Actually that should be now since that stopped being a buzz word a decade ago already.

[Phaelducan]

It's natural for any company to take things which work well, sell well, and resonate well from one product and implement them into another.

No one with any real perspective will claim that DA:Origins was a perfect game. The same will be said for Mass Effect 1.
However.... a LOT of people did say that ME:2 was near-perfect (the reviews also support this).

Now, as a reasonable forum, I'm sure everyone can detach their own views about which game was or was not better, and instead look at it from Bioware's point of view purely in terms of A) Critical Success and Financial Success.

Now, with those two things in mind, ask the question again. Should ME:2 in any way potentially influence how Bioware developed DA:2?

(Oh and for the record, Kotor 1 was my favorite Bioware RPG anyway, with NWN being second, but I did play and like both ME games as well as DA:0).

[shootist70]

OP, no, you're not the only one. In fact I'm pretty sure that the 'hobbyists' who enjoy fiddling with intrusive game mechanics are just a very small yet very vocal minority on games forums. The amount of sales they represent are probably tiny compared to the amount of sales Bioware would get from people who simply enjoy a streamlined experience focused more on strong narrative, action, characters and player choice. So we can probably just go ahead and humour them.

Modifié par shootist70, 27 août 2010 - 09:10 .

[eucatastrophe]

Eurypterid wrote...

I love the Mass Effect series. Excellent games, and a ton of fun. But if, by 'Mass Effectify', you mean change the game mechanics to the degree that it's not recognizable as Dragon Age; thinks such as (for a couple examples):

- remove the ability to directly control each individual party member
- remove the 'RPG-ness' of the quests and looting
- change the leveling mechanics
- remove the tactical camera controls

then I say "No thanks". That's not what Dragon Age is. I like different games for different reasons and I don't want Dragon Age to be turned into Mass Effect (or Dragon Effect, if you prefer). They're different games and a big reason I love both of them so much is because they're not the same game packaged in a different setting.

Said it best.

[Rive Caedo]

Ultimately this boils down to something along these lines.
If Origins had never come out in the way it did - if it had been "Mass Effecty" from the start... would people complain?
Well, yes. People would say "It's medieval Mass Effect! Boo!" the same way people said Starcraft was just "Warcraft in space! Boo!"

Of course, that didn't stop Starcraft from becoming a massive success.

If Dragon Age and Mass Effect do converge moreso than they already have, they'll still feel significantly different from each other in the same fashion as Warcraft and Starcraft.

Though, yes, some people are going to want to play Diablo

Wyndham711 wrote...

One of the core things I enjoy in RPGs
is the fact that not every moment is intense or enticing. I relish the
slow, "dull" moments of inventory management, vendoring and running
around from one questgiver to another. These mellow parts award the
gameplay a calming feeling of respiration. Every now and then a battle
ensues and the excitement level increases - you really get to appreciate
the intense moments (since they can't be taken for granted when the
whole game is not constant excitement) and similarly be glad of the
peaceful "fluff".

Also, the slow gameplay increases the actual
length of the games. A game made solely of intense gameplay is bound to
be short and exhausting. I much prefer a LONG game with a lot of
meandering, mellow moments spiced up with action.

Hm... I agree with this partly.
Do I like the "mellow" moments breaking up the action? Absolutely.
But I prefer those to be companion chats or specifically scripted non-action conversations (Alistair talking to you after the first Archdemon dream, to give a random example).
A rarer non-dialogue example would be crossing the bridge at Ostagar (once to get in, once to head to the tower during the battle).
Mellow story/exploration moments. Not inventory management.

Jacks Smirking Revenge wrote...

Rive Caedo wrote...

Lawrence- Mage of the Grey Wardens wrote...

"Am I the only one that wants my RPGs to play more like Halo?"

Stupid thread is stupid.

Right. Because Halo totalllllly had a storyline, choices, and characters that were as important to the game as Origins' were to it.

Totally.

I think you should reread what he said and what the OP said then post again.

As you wish.

fanman72 wrote...
Keep the characters, story, plot, visuals,
graphics, choices etc interesting.  Those are the only elements i really
care from an RPG.  Then for all I care it can play like Dragon Effect
2.

Oh look, he specifically mentioned that he wanted to keep the storyline, choices, and characters. It's almost as if I DID read the original post and was deliberately indirectly quoting it?

Merced256 wrote...
ME2 is the closest the world has gotten to a 60 dollar movie, hopefully the trend doesn't continue.

Clearly you didn't play Heavy Rain
You're also leaving out the word "interactive", which is a huge difference between Bioware games and films. Even if, yes, they're significantly more dialogue/character driven than Pacman.

[DaringMoosejaw]

Totally agree with Occam on this. ME2 didn't do everything right, but there were certain steps in the right direction. That doesn't mean I think DA2 should be like ME2, or move things that worked fine toward ME2 for the hell of it, but I more agree with the spirit of the specific changes from ME1 to ME2. The inventory streamlining was a big improvement, and though I liked what they did with armor I wish they gave you way more armor pieces and let you customize the DLC armor a lot more.



Tedium has always been a necessary evil with me when it came to RPGs, and I'm glad to see them try to get rid of it. It seems a lot of people here are obsessed with the classic, 'lolz, u enjoy thingz I don't so u r teh stupidz!!!!!111 go ply haloz sum moar' strawman, but that's hardly surprising that some people feel it necessary to try to use their choice of video games to inflate their intelligence as they apparently have few other methods to do so.

[Heimdall]

I love the Mass Effect games to death but there is a limit to how much Mass Effect I want in my Dragon Age.



Fortunately, there appears to be little to no 'Mass Effectication' or whatever going on. Yes there is a dialogue wheel for the voiced protagonist, though if anything it appears to be an improvement over Mass Effect's. The combat is faster paced, that doesn't mean it's become a hack and slash.



It is confirmed that we still have inventory, and the leveling system sounds like an improved version of the Origins one rather than a complete overhaul



The only thing I can think of is the lack of isometric camera. The removal of which I don't think has anything to do with Mass Effect, but rather with Bioware's efforts to improve combat on consoles (Which was not very good in DA:O)

[Gaddmeister]

@OP:

Levelling up is a fundamental feature. I can tolerate much and I even think the simple ME2 system can be fun for a change and kind of fits the game. But "No I don't care about leveling up".... Dude, you're going to far now. If DA2 should ship without a levelling system I would really hesitate to get that game. If there is something that I expect from a Bioware game it's a levelling system, among other things as well of course.

Modifié par Gaddmeister, 27 août 2010 - 10:26 .

[Rive Caedo]

That one I will agree with, Gaddmeister. Leveling up, unlike inventory management of large amounts of useless items, is not tedium whatsoever. So yes, the OP went too far there.



UNLESS you need to grind to level... but you don't in either DA or ME.

[DaringMoosejaw]

Rive Caedo wrote...

That one I will agree with, Gaddmeister. Leveling up, unlike inventory management of large amounts of useless items, is not tedium whatsoever. So yes, the OP went too far there.

UNLESS you need to grind to level... but you don't in either DA or ME.

Indeed, the levelling up is important. Sad that it is, however. Heaven forbid the master deprive the mice of their reward cheese.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Yeah, its well done in DA and ME as leveling actually makes you more powerful.



However I do see where it is abused and made

Indeed, the levelling up is important. Sad that it is, however. Heaven forbid the master deprive the mice of their reward cheese.

Something as an excuse for progression. Like Ratchet and Clank Future and Too Human where leveling was ultimately useless becaues you didn't increase in power. Luckily those don't seem to be the norm.



I like rewards. Leveling is a reward.

[Gaddmeister]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Rive Caedo wrote...

That one I will agree with, Gaddmeister. Leveling up, unlike inventory management of large amounts of useless items, is not tedium whatsoever. So yes, the OP went too far there.

UNLESS you need to grind to level... but you don't in either DA or ME.

Indeed, the levelling up is important. Sad that it is, however. Heaven forbid the master deprive the mice of their reward cheese.

Ha ha, I like cheese. But on a serious note, levelling gives me a sense of development for my character. And if I get to choose how to level up, rather than the game automatically making my character more powerful, it gives me some kind of connection to the character, like I'm the one in charge. It's hard to describe, but I think a levelling system is essential in a RPG. But if any game developer could prove me wrong, then be my guest.

[Rive Caedo]

I'm not even sure if leveling up counts as reward cheese in Dragon Age, since enemies scale relatively well to your level. So it's more progression/mixing things up.

Non-junk equipment was reward cheese. Go Go Lifegiver!

[Gaddmeister]

Rive Caedo wrote...

I'm not even sure if leveling up counts as reward cheese in Dragon Age, since enemies scale relatively well to your level. So it's more progression/mixing things up.
Non-junk equipment was reward cheese. Go Go Lifegiver!

Yeah, scaling is something I'm not a big fan of. I'd rather like other, more powerful enemy types.