332 réponses à ce sujet

[Monica83]

THanks Simalarion i appreciate it...



Not let's try to avodi the costumer user and vote philosophy (aagh hard word sorry lol) We talk about the game here we have this opportunity what do you like of what you reand and what do you don't like?

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

If it's so small as to be imperceptibly different from zero, does it matter?

Sure.

How can you tell?

Perceptions aren't reality.

That's beside the point.  I'm not disputing that the difference exists.  I'm disputing that the difference should drive individual behaviour.

[Jestina]

The trailer evoked visions of Dragon Ball, Mass Effect 2, and those Chinese action films.

I'm not interested in a film...where is the game?

[Monica83]

*laughs* Dwarws are always the best! lol

Well why dont show you the game also a short video to permit to have us an idea of what dragon age will be.. I think sometimes word can't explain all we must see if a gameplay video can bring us to be a little more worried... I Just loved the trailer... But its only a video and..Well is not so much exagerate if you compare it with the lineage 2 ones lol... Yes we want to know more.. what we know for now isn't enought and this talk about only of gameplay stat skills and many other things make me feel to mutch action oriented marketing to be a nice roleplay game... Maybe its only an impression maybe i will wrong but i have this felt..

[Rayhaana]

javierabegazo wrote...

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

Um, no one is insisting that at all. The point is, would I rather play a high quality game that is 5 hours long or a high quality game that is 15 hours long? 

[sreaction]

Aradace wrote...

sreaction wrote...

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

Lets see javierabegazo poster mentions "quality of game" I mention "good" game then somehow you want to dismiss DAO because some cheesy game rental businines doesnt rate it great? Good, bad, great whats the point? The answer will always be subjective depending on what site rates it and who their custormer base is. Besides Gamefly is for console gamers: a  total different breed of gamer : console games= simplistic audience, PC games= cerebral audience.  IGN rates PC version of  DAO a 9  so what. We are talking about the relevence of quality and the length of the game. Not, what subjective label people want to put on the game.

Modifié par sreaction, 09 septembre 2010 - 02:29 .

[Monica83]

More the gameis longer.. better chance to have improved contets in terms of roleplaibility

[Onyx Jaguar]

Not really, from most of the games I have played longer means either grinding, going through added on levels that detract from the experience. Or in the case of Wizardry games the games move really, really slow.

[Monica83]

A long story give you better the opportunity to a deep immersion on the world... Is far better than one shot story because you live your character and you have many ways improved..If a game is short that mean less things in in so no dynamic decisions no opportunity to sway from the main quest.. lack of content of the gameworld.. I loved DAO because with the origins storyes you will be introduced well in the situation to be different races.. You see where them can from how the society interact with them and you have a lot informations of the world backgroud.. Soo more lenght more opportunity to get better thing.. I can say also sometimes long game can be whitout a deep storyline and whitout nice information about the ambient where you play..Off course the lenght helps a lot a true roleplay game

[Sylvius the Mad]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Not really, from most of the games I have played longer means either grinding, going through added on levels that detract from the experience. Or in the case of Wizardry games the games move really, really slow.

Wizardry games are basically all combat.  Combat is their core gameplay.

[Stillwater]

javierabegazo wrote...

Well of all the games I've played, a longer game does in no way mean it's superior to the shorter games I've played, when it comes to quality of story,

Longer games aren't necessarily better, but they have a better chance of being better - if done well. With a longer game, you can fit in more plot points, deeper character development, more nuanced 'stop to smell the roses' moments, and a storyline that feels more epic. There's more chance that the player will feel immersed, will feel emotional ties to the characters.

Length brings with it certain advantages: a well-written TV show always has far more opportunity for in-depth character development than a well-written movie does. It's simple physics: character development requires time, and a longer story has more time to play with.

Plus, if a game is fantastic, who wants it to end quickly?

Modifié par Stillwater, 09 septembre 2010 - 04:31 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

javierabegazo wrote...

Well of all the games I've played, a longer game does in no way mean it's superior to the shorter games I've played, when it comes to quality of story,

Progressing from peasant to god-killing-abomination should be the work of a lifetime, and not something that happens over just a few weeks.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  The proper rate of advancement in a CRPG is 4-5 D&D-sized levels per 60-80 hours of gameplay.

If you want to to make a 40 hour game, I would hope to equal the progression found within NWN's tutorial.

[Onyx Jaguar]

hmm, again seems purely subjective to me



No Western RPG I have played made me spend 60-80 hours in storymode. Baldur's Gate promptly took me about 25 (without the expansion), Planescape Torment took me about thirty and Neverwinter Nights took me about 20 hours (not including the expansions). DA:O took me longer for some reason, around 40 hours.

[DarthCaine]

First of all, do you actually know what Adventure games are? Games like Monkey Island, Sam & Max, Broken Sword, Syberia and The Longest Journey are adventure games. Games like Uncharted, Tomb Raider, Prince of Persia and Batman Arkham Asylum are NOT adventure games.

Secondly, quality > quantity. I preferred KOTOR's and ME2's 35 hours over DAO's 60 hours

Modifié par DarthCaine, 09 septembre 2010 - 06:22 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

hmm, again seems purely subjective to me

No Western RPG I have played made me spend 60-80 hours in storymode. Baldur's Gate promptly took me about 25 (without the expansion), Planescape Torment took me about thirty and Neverwinter Nights took me about 20 hours (not including the expansions). DA:O took me longer for some reason, around 40 hours.

Whereas, DAO took me 87 hours (not counting reloads and backtracking) the first time through.  I never kept track of BG, but I've played through its first 5 chapters probably 20 times, and that counts a lot toward its quality in my opinion (BG+TotSC ranks among the four best computer games I've ever played, regardless of genre).

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
That's beside the point.  I'm not disputing that the difference exists.  I'm disputing that the difference should drive individual behaviour.

Well, that wasn't quite what you were saying. But since I had a pretty good idea that was what you meant, I was being a bit disingenuous back there.

Anyway, where does that take you? Except to show that egoistic rationality is a failure, since people don't decide things that way and if people did decide things that way their outcomes would be worse, not better.

Remember,  Downs Paradox is a paradox because people do vote.

The relevance to DA2 would seem to be zero; nobody's making DA2 purchasing decisions to send Bioware a signal, even if some folks talk like that's what they're doing.

Modifié par AlanC9, 09 septembre 2010 - 07:28 .

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I've said it before and I'll say it again.  The proper rate of advancement in a CRPG is 4-5 D&D-sized levels per 60-80 hours of gameplay.

Hmmm... so let's take the lower estimates there. To reach level 20 (no Epics for us), that's 240 hours. For folks with jobs, families, lives, that might be a bit much. The entire run of Buffy the Vampire Slayer was only 146 hours, including commercials, and that took seven years to finish.

Edit: That's including the feature film, since the TV series is supposed to be a sequel to that.

Modifié par AlanC9, 09 septembre 2010 - 07:38 .

[KLUME777]

at OP, You haven't played the game so you have no idea if DA2 is limited in its roleplaying

[KLUME777]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

hmm, again seems purely subjective to me

No Western RPG I have played made me spend 60-80 hours in storymode. Baldur's Gate promptly took me about 25 (without the expansion), Planescape Torment took me about thirty and Neverwinter Nights took me about 20 hours (not including the expansions). DA:O took me longer for some reason, around 40 hours.

Whereas, DAO took me 87 hours (not counting reloads and backtracking) the first time through.  I never kept track of BG, but I've played through its first 5 chapters probably 20 times, and that counts a lot toward its quality in my opinion (BG+TotSC ranks among the four best computer games I've ever played, regardless of genre).

@ Sylvius,         My DAO game went for 87 hours as well.



@ Onyx Jaguar,       Wow, what western RPGs have you played? Fallout 3 and Oblivion has given me over 200 hours in a given playthrough each, KOTOR takes around the same as DAO, which is 87 hours.

[Faz432]

javierabegazo wrote...

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

Size matters...

If DA2 is equal in quality to DA:O, then less of it would equal less of a game.

Modifié par Faz432, 09 septembre 2010 - 09:04 .

[Aradace]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Well of all the games I've played, a longer game does in no way mean it's superior to the shorter games I've played, when it comes to quality of story,

Progressing from peasant to god-killing-abomination should be the work of a lifetime, and not something that happens over just a few weeks.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  The proper rate of advancement in a CRPG is 4-5 D&D-sized levels per 60-80 hours of gameplay.

If you want to to make a 40 hour game, I would hope to equal the progression found within NWN's tutorial.

My only arguement is that based off of RPGs made within the last 7 years, there is a list (a substantial one at that) of RPGs that are 30 hours and UNDER and most of them were damn good RPGs in my opinion.  Next to a list of RPGs in the last 7 years that are OVER 30 hours, the OVER 30 hour list loses.....by a landslide.  My point is this:  25-30 hours in an RPG by today's standard is SoP.  Sure, folks can pull from the KotoR and BG or Fallout or Elder Scrolls pool, but all those together STILL doesnt equal the list of RPGs in the past 7 years that are 30 hours or less.   "Shorter" RPGs are the standard now days.  Its something we all have to accept.  People dont have to like it, but they have to accept it because its the universally accepted "norm".   So complaining that DA2 is going to be "shorter" really is kind of pointless.

[RexAnthony]

I fear i am to play a JRPG where most of the time is "seeing" your character instead of "doing" something yourself.

[Faz432]

Aradace wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Well of all the games I've played, a longer game does in no way mean it's superior to the shorter games I've played, when it comes to quality of story,

Progressing from peasant to god-killing-abomination should be the work of a lifetime, and not something that happens over just a few weeks.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  The proper rate of advancement in a CRPG is 4-5 D&D-sized levels per 60-80 hours of gameplay.

If you want to to make a 40 hour game, I would hope to equal the progression found within NWN's tutorial.

My only arguement is that based off of RPGs made within the last 7 years, there is a list (a substantial one at that) of RPGs that are 30 hours and UNDER and most of them were damn good RPGs in my opinion.  Next to a list of RPGs in the last 7 years that are OVER 30 hours, the OVER 30 hour list loses.....by a landslide.  My point is this:  25-30 hours in an RPG by today's standard is SoP.  Sure, folks can pull from the KotoR and BG or Fallout or Elder Scrolls pool, but all those together STILL doesnt equal the list of RPGs in the past 7 years that are 30 hours or less.   "Shorter" RPGs are the standard now days.  Its something we all have to accept.  People dont have to like it, but they have to accept it because its the universally accepted "norm".   So complaining that DA2 is going to be "shorter" really is kind of pointless.

I'd like to see your lists, I reckon you're wrong.