332 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

I'm not sure personality #1 there works in DAO, let alone DA2.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm not sure personality #1 there works in DAO, let alone DA2.

It was the most rewarding roleplaying experience I've had in a CRPG in many years.

[Lumikki]

Is it so important to build personality that it will become to game it self. I mean in roleplaying, player plays role and if possible play role what player has defined. How ever, it's not just the role, but adventure where that character is going. Biggest problems are, roles are so define that player has no freedom to make own role. There isn't adventure, because story is so weak that only thing what's keeping hole game togather is just banter.

If we play Hawke, we should define what kind of person he/she is. Also when we go to adventure, it should be about the adventure, not just about with who you are and they relationships.

I'm not so fraid about DA2 becoming adventure, because that would be good thing. I'm fraid it becomes sims in fantasy world. Have you seen what people are asking in this forum. Ability make babies, have sex, been nude, have romance and love,  decorate houses. Are we talking playing Dragon Age adventure rolepaying game or playing virtual house with barbi dolls.

Modifié par Lumikki, 15 septembre 2010 - 06:50 .

[0x30A88]

Let's compare Origins to Awakening. In origins, the pace is shifting and you have those calm moments where you can relax and do a few sidequests. You get to know some of the companions. In Awakening however, I had 15 hours of gameplay. Yet the same amount of followers. Awakening was kind of short and very stressing. One were sent from an adventure to another without the long distance traveling and doing all that sidequests.

Don't get me wrong. The characters in Awakening were all interesting.

Length matters if you are going to get to know your folloers.

EDIT: My "w"-key is not cooperating, quite annoying while writing.

Modifié par Gisle Aune, 15 septembre 2010 - 08:10 .

[euramer1]

I fully agree with the above, I play to relax with fighting, sight seeing...

[tlong]

I don't know either way... To go really old school, one of the most satisfying games I have ever played was Wing Commander, a flight sim. But a flight sim with a strong plot and characters I grew to care about. But in no way an RPG Limited choices in personality and no choices in role, but a good game. The same could also be said of FF7.



However I am a huge fan of table top games, because level of customization allows for greater plot and storytelling options.



But then I hate.... hate MMORPGs because while they allow for great customization, there is no plot or storytelling, just camping for experience.



BG, IWD, BG2 and IWD2 all succeeded because they were able to combine the two effectively, and that was BioWare's strength for many years, and this brings me to my great fear.



History is littered with RPG companies that deviated to far from their strengths, and no longer exist or have a diminished impact on the computer gaming industry. ie ORIGIN or TSR. There were companies who did not try new ground and were lost or absorbed by other entities. ie Atari, or Sega. (Yes, I know Atari fronted for NWN but they are NOT what they were before the crash of 85.)



So while BioWare is pushing DA2 in new directions, and that is good, does it run the risk of alienating a large enough group of users that DA2 is not a bestseller, which might put it on EA's chopping block in this bad economy?

[ShrinkingFish]

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

It is a question of immersion.

Same reason why length effects the quality of written works, especially novels.

Shorter games are not nearly as immersive as longer ones.

One of the major weaknesses in Awakening was how short it was. It came off as abrupt and the very richly written and well rounded characters didn't get nearly enough exposure for as soon as you recruited the last one you were forced into the final conflict.

On the flip side one of the major strengths of Origins was that it was such a long game. The player was given the opportunity to get to know their own character as well as their companions very intimately. To the point where the player could actually care about the fates of the computer characters rather than dismiss them entirely.

A prime example is Zevran as compared to Velenna and Justice.

When Zevran betrayed me in my first playthrough of Origins I actually felt betrayed. I didn't see it coming and I regretted being forced to kill him.

Meanwhile, in Awakening, when I defended Amarathine I left Velenna and Justice to defend the keep. Velenna was crushed under a pile of rock and Justice was killed and I could not have cared less about either of them.

It all has to do with the time spent with the characters. Essentially, how long the game is. More time spent = more personal investment in the places and characters.

In addition, as a point of interest in my gaming experience, I make it my personal policy to never buy a game that is under 30 hours long unless it comes very highly recommended by gamers I trust.

[CptSkull]

I heard about people who buy games at $60 and the game is only 4 hours long with no replay value, now that's a bigger rip off then buying tickets for a 3-D movie.....or the recent DLC for Dragon Age: Origins

Modifié par CptSkull, 21 septembre 2010 - 05:30 .