332 réponses à ce sujet

[ErichHartmann]

Marionetten wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

... but I'd rather them sacrifice meaningless, forgettable side quests than sacrifice the main narrative and story arc and character development.

Which isn't the case.

They are sacrificing it for the sake of presentation.

Yes, sacrificing certain elements for a stronger narrative and storlyine is bad.

[Lumikki]

First Mass Effect serie has some roleplaying part, but it's not traditional RPG. DAO how ever, is traditional RPG and now maybe it's sequel less traditional RPG. mm.. I don't know what to think. I was maybe think that DAO's sequel would not go same direction as Mass Effect serie. Mass Effect serie is more cinematic style what is great and fits the style. How ever, DAO has been little different style. Now I get feeling like DA2 is becoming closer to ME1 style. Taking races off and only humans left. I don't my self play warrior ever, but I don't get it, why can't warrior has two weapons in hand or bow. Doesn't make any sense. It's like only way to create differences in classes is through combat system. There is more in gameplay than just combat or is DA2 be so much combat focus?

[Aradace]

ErichHartmann wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

... but I'd rather them sacrifice meaningless, forgettable side quests than sacrifice the main narrative and story arc and character development.

Which isn't the case.

They are sacrificing it for the sake of presentation.

Yes, sacrificing certain elements for a stronger narrative and storlyine is bad.

I hope we're not complaining about how DA2 isnt going to be 50-60 hrs long and because of that, making assumptions that the game is going to be garbage?  At least, that's what Im getting out of most of this so far

[Rake21]

the_one_54321 wrote...

marquiseondore wrote...

Rake21 wrote...

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

Final Fantasy XIII:  about 80 hours of crap.

This a million times.  The game was beautiful but was the most tedious sorry excuse for an RPG.  By the end of the game I hate all the characters.

Winged Warrior by comparison was very short but fun.

FFXIII is a horrible example. When making examples to prove a point, you should find objects that are almost universally agreed upon. There are tons of people that disagree with you about FFXIII. All you accomplish is creating a whole seperate argument about FFXIII.

Alright, that was an opinion on my part, I hate that game.  I was just trying to point out that length does not a good game make.  It helps, sometimes, but in extreme cases it can make a game seem like getting your teeth yanked out.  I'm sure there's a more agreeable example out there somewhere that would work, too.

[Monica83]

JRPG and Orpg are complete different we can't compare them.. Anyways what about the other things? We talked only about the lenght

[sanadawarrior]

Schwadragon wrote...

Akka le Vil wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

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

How can you NOT include length into the several factors of quality ?

Do you include length as a factor in the quality of a book or a movie?

Yes, but it can go either way, some games overstay their welcome towards the end (Red Dead Redemption) others I wish could have been a bit longer (Mafia II). I by no means always think longer = better though.

[AlanC9]

bluewolv1970 wrote...

you obviously have not played a game like morrowind, where you can essentially join factions and do misc quests (including a lot of freeform) without ever even finishing the main quest and feel like you got your moneys worth...

Or he played it and found it incredibly boring. The more sidequests I did in MW the more I wanted to get back to the main plot so I could finish the game and move on. I felt the same way about most of the UNC missions in ME1.

Modifié par AlanC9, 08 septembre 2010 - 05:57 .

[Monica83]

Well we dont know that Lumi devs says combat is improved in DA2 i think bioware create a nice storyline for the product... But i think origins the first one offer much more in terms of roleplayability race selection origins stories not static specialization.. I don't approve the choice to make dragon age series like that... They improved the design and this is nice.. They added voiced character well is not required for an rpg and i thinks this maded bioware decide to make only human playable.. They are talking alot of gameplay and what they say i dont like much,,Its a pity make a new design and limit ervything to a single playable race.. silly but... hey i can survive this... I don't like the fact they added the dialog wheel to the game.. I Really hope this dont force us to see generic response..For this i opened this thread to share information and listen what people thinks about that... And from what i eared im a bit worried..

[AlanC9]

You very well might like DA2 less. It is not possible to please everybody.



Are you a console or a PC player, Monica83? PC gameplay seems to be changed less than console gameplay

[Monica83]

Im a pc user i have a console too but i prefear use my pc to play roleplay games also for mods

[captain.subtle]

AlanC9 wrote...

bluewolv1970 wrote...

you obviously have not played a game like morrowind, where you can essentially join factions and do misc quests (including a lot of freeform) without ever even finishing the main quest and feel like you got your moneys worth...

Or he played it and found it incredibly boring. The more sidequests I did in MW the more I wanted to get back to the main plot so I could finish the game and move on. I felt the same way about most of the UNC missions in ME1.

I believe that this is a very personal opinion. Morrowind (and its predecessors) gave a nice outline of how a sandbox RPG should be.

I entirely respect what you say. But sandbox is necessarily defined as a genre being able to divert from plotline (if one exists) and do quests that interest you.

There is an argument that these quests tend to be repeatative, but I think that is irrelevent. How do you expect a single player game to come up with innovative quests/interactions indefinitely? (you don't). That said, Morrowind and Sid-Meier's Pirates! did an amazing job of making games with RPG elements that allowed the PC to actually fell like an individual trying and making his own destiny as he saw fit. I rather think of it as an innovation  in gaming than anything else! If somebody (like in Oblivion) comes up with something to top that ,would you shun it or welcome it?

Modifié par captain.subtle, 08 septembre 2010 - 06:06 .

[Ortaya Alevli]

I would assume that the original poster meant "action" or something close while using the word "adventure". Makes sense especially considering what is classified as "action" in entertainment industry is called "adventure" in some countries where languages different than English are spoken.

Even though I wouldn't consider length a factor in quality, certainly its value cannot be neglected. I was upset that Jade Empire was such a short game. Well, relatively. My greatest disappointment in that regard was Full Throttle. Anyway, a big plus for any roleplaying or adventure game is its length. They're not like shooters which you'd play a favorite level for fifteen minutes and then exit. Their replayability is restricted by several factors, contrary to many other genres. There's no denying the importance of length in any RPG. Well, except the famous Soviet-made RPG.

Sorry about that bit of lameness, it's just I realized I was writing in a too serious tone.

[Monica83]

Well you are duncan! you must be serious!

[marquiseondore]

the_one_54321 wrote...

marquiseondore wrote...

Rake21 wrote...

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

Final Fantasy XIII:  about 80 hours of crap.

This a million times.  The game was beautiful but was the most tedious sorry excuse for an RPG.  By the end of the game I hate all the characters.

Winged Warrior by comparison was very short but fun.

FFXIII is a horrible example. When making examples to prove a point, you should find objects that are almost universally agreed upon. There are tons of people that disagree with you about FFXIII. All you accomplish is creating a whole seperate argument about FFXIII.

The point would be a developer could spend time making a visually appealing game and not put the same effort towards the story.  You should be able to play through a game and know what is going on without having to crack open the guide book and not wait for every cutscene.

Modifié par marquiseondore, 08 septembre 2010 - 06:11 .

[maxernst]

AlanC9 wrote...

bluewolv1970 wrote...

you obviously have not played a game like morrowind, where you can essentially join factions and do misc quests (including a lot of freeform) without ever even finishing the main quest and feel like you got your moneys worth...

Or he played it and found it incredibly boring. The more sidequests I did in MW the more I wanted to get back to the main plot so I could finish the game and move on. I felt the same way about most of the UNC missions in ME1.

Although I loved the setting of Morrowind, I spent more time playing DA:O.  It was hard to really feel you were playing a character in Morrowind.  Your interactions with NPC's were very shallow and it didn't really seem to matter much what you did, so there was no emotional involvement.  I didn't find it incredibly boring, unlike Oblivion.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Monica83 wrote...

Well you are duncan! you must be serious!

Serious people get tossed around by ogres and take a blow to the head by darkspawn. No thanks. hehe

[UberDuber]

Dragon age 2 is not impressive so far. I only want to continue my wardens story, the only thing I like about DA2 is Flemeth.

[sreaction]

javierabegazo wrote...

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

because quality, immersion, complexity, and an intricate story  tend to make a game longer (aka. dao). sure a game could be short and great but if something is good dont most people like to prolong it?

on the other hand maybe the length is shortened because, the want to milk the dlc.

[Aradace]

sreaction wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

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

because quality, immersion, complexity, and an intricate story  tend to make a game longer (aka. dao). sure a game could be short and great but if something is good dont most people like to prolong it?

on the other hand maybe the length is shortened because, the want to milk the dlc.

Gamefly gave DA:O, based on 14,900+ member ratings, a 7.7 out of 10....which makes it a GOOD game....Not GREAT.  With that in mind, we cant really use DA:O as a guidepost for anything in terms of "greatness".  New comparison plz

[marquiseondore]

Besides with DAO we had 6 origin stories which all intersected.

[Marionetten]

ErichHartmann wrote...
Yes, sacrificing certain elements for a stronger narrative and storlyine is bad.

A voiced PC has nothing to do with either. It's a matter of presentation.

Modifié par Marionetten, 08 septembre 2010 - 06:22 .

[AlanC9]

captain.subtle wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Or he played it and found it incredibly boring. The more sidequests I did in MW the more I wanted to get back to the main plot so I could finish the game and move on. I felt the same way about most of the UNC missions in ME1.

I believe that this is a very personal opinion. Morrowind (and its predecessors) gave a nice outline of how a sandbox RPG should be.

I entirely respect what you say. But sandbox is necessarily defined as a genre being able to divert from plotline (if one exists) and do quests that interest you.

Indeed so. I was just taking issue with bluewolv1970's statement that "you obviously have not played a game like morrowind." Not everyone likes that kind of game, even if the developer has done the game well.

[AlanC9]

Aradace wrote...

Gamefly gave DA:O, based on 14,900+ member ratings, a 7.7 out of 10....which makes it a GOOD game....Not GREAT.  With that in mind, we cant really use DA:O as a guidepost for anything in terms of "greatness".  New comparison plz

You prefer Gamefly's ratings to other sources? That's your prerogative, but why Gamefly over, say, GameSpot?

[Aradace]

AlanC9 wrote...

Aradace wrote...

Gamefly gave DA:O, based on 14,900+ member ratings, a 7.7 out of 10....which makes it a GOOD game....Not GREAT.  With that in mind, we cant really use DA:O as a guidepost for anything in terms of "greatness".  New comparison plz

You prefer Gamefly's ratings to other sources? That's your prerogative, but why Gamefly over, say, GameSpot?

Because Gamefly is an online game rental site....Based off of user reviews and not "critic" heavy reviews.

[Monica83]

The voice things its not a great feature after all... If to put in it you have to cut away the nice features that origins had like character selection and the other things.. Since... I don't know why people jumps happy to have a voiced character when for put in this feature you can cut things like race selection i find it useless..