332 réponses à ce sujet

[Ortaya Alevli]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Generally it depends on "what" aspects of the story you are referring to

In Baldur's Gate, Oblivion and the Fallout games (1, 2 and 3) the actual main story path are not really that long.  However they are all affected by additional content within the game.  Lots of sidequests and the like (and hell in the aspects of those games just exploring).  

A JRPG on the other hand can get confusing to determine as you end up running through a storyline in a linear order, however they tend to take awhile because of grinding and the like.

In regards to the first Dragon Age it splits up the story quite a bit.  Kind of in phases.  You basically have some side quest hubs and story "excuses" as the primary story has more to do with Loghain than the Darkspawn invasion.  And even that much of the game is recruiting allies and are their own self contained stories.

Exactly. "Additional content" add a lot to a game. Sidequests etc. in BG2 helped expand the lore greatly. You could deal with slave traders, piraters, kidnappers, graverobbers, druids gone wild (uh wait), worldwide organizations, religious orders... There was so much to see and hear in Amn, and it didn't go to waste thanks to additional content. Not everything has to be directly tied to the main plot. Well-designed and detailed adventures on the side (not talking about twenty bear asses stuff here) will prolong your experience as well as allow you to get the most out of the game world, letting you feel more like a part of it and maximizing the immersion and, in turn, entertainment.

Japanese stuff is not my thing, so I'll restrain myself. Anything I said about it would be negative at best, so I'm moving along now.

Dragon Age's storyline makes sense, though. You need an army of your own to face another; Rambo thing gets old. And you're helping your potential allies in ways they couldn't triumph solely with the help of their military force. Of course you get sidetracked a lot along the way, but you know BioWare; nothing, and I repeat, nothing is an enough reason for a protagonist to rush things.

[Aradace]

Faz432 wrote...

If they want to be an average/normal studio then yes but if they want to be in the very best like they are now then it would suggest they need to produce lengthy masterpieces rather than short knock offs.

I'm not saying that short games can't be good but if they are doesn't that leave you with a feeling of being short changed?

Apparently, they disagree with you as per ME2 and DA2 (In terms of length).  In the end, its what THEY want...Not what you want.  The primary reason these forums exist is so in the off chance the consumer comes up with a cool idea to implement that they agree with.  So again, complain all you want, just dont be delusional in thinking its going to change anything.

[Faz432]

I'm not complaining or being delusional, I'm just suggesting why the length of a game might be a factor in how good it is and when you think about a 'epic masterpiece' like Dragon Age markets itself, I think that's fair not to end up with a short knock off which many people fear DA2 might be.

Modifié par Faz432, 09 septembre 2010 - 10:53 .

[Aradace]

Faz432 wrote...

I'm not complaining or being delusional I'm just suggesting why the length of a game might be a factor in how good it is and when you think about a 'epic masterpiece' like Dragon Age markets itself I think that's fair not to end up with a short knock off.

Might be a factor.....MIGHT....that's a maybe....a possibility....a chance.  Wait until the game launches THEN pass judgement.

[Faz432]

If they didn't want us to comment on the info they've released they wouldn't release any info.

Modifié par Faz432, 09 septembre 2010 - 10:56 .

[Aradace]

Faz432 wrote...

If they didn't want us to comment on the info they've released they shouldn't release any info.

Im not saying people shouldnt comment....But there's a point when "commenting" turns into complaining (not saying you in particular).  And "complaining" about a game that's not even out yet is pretty stupid.

[FDrage]

Ok ... one question ... when does comment become complaining ?

Oki .. two questions (of sorts) ... when should you comment on something you don't like (based on the info available that is) ... when there is still the slightest possibility that something can be done or after the fact in hope that there will be a next game when they potentially can rectify game mechanics, etc. that drew too many of the wrong comments?



Just asking and not trying to make a value statement

[Aradace]

FDrage wrote...

Ok ... one question ... when does comment become complaining ?
Oki .. two questions (of sorts) ... when should you comment on something you don't like (based on the info available that is) ... when there is still the slightest possibility that something can be done or after the fact in hope that there will be a next game when they potentially can rectify game mechanics, etc. that drew too many of the wrong comments?

Just asking and not trying to make a value statement

Example of commenting on said readily available data:

"Hmmm...Shorter huh?  Im not sure I agree with that but I suppose we should just wait and see what happens"

Complaining:

"A shorter game?! OMFGFUBBQ!! BioWarez, what are j00z thinking!? If DA2 is not as long as DA:O That means itz going to suxx0rz by defaultz so I dont need to know anything else and so not buying the game!!!"  Which in essence is what some folks here are saying right now.  Not everyone, but some are. 

[Danjaru]

I'm just worried they'll implement the dreadful mid scene "renegade" or "paragon" action thingy like they have in Mass Effect 2. In a rpg you shouldn't loose control of your character to that degree, almost never knew what to expect when clicking on those.

[Aradace]

Danjaru wrote...

I'm just worried they'll implement the dreadful mid scene "renegade" or "paragon" action thingy like they have in Mass Effect 2. In a rpg you shouldn't loose control of your character to that degree, almost never knew what to expect when clicking on those.

Actually as a side note, I should mention that they've already said they are classifying DA2 as an "Action RPG" so if you do see these (which IMO was cool in ME2) or something similar, dont be suprised.

[FDrage]

Aradace wrote...

Actually as a side note, I should mention that they've already said they are classifying DA2 as an "Action RPG" so if you do see these (which IMO was cool in ME2) or something similar, dont be suprised.

so, iirc David Gaider said that "they clasified" or was it "could clasify" DA:O as an "Action RPG" ...

[Aradace]

FDrage wrote...

Aradace wrote...

Actually as a side note, I should mention that they've already said they are classifying DA2 as an "Action RPG" so if you do see these (which IMO was cool in ME2) or something similar, dont be suprised.

so, iirc David Gaider said that "they clasified" or was it "could clasify" DA:O as an "Action RPG" ...

That's strait from a couple of the EA/BioWare guys during an interview recently on X-Play.
It was something along the lines of "We're trying to make it as great an Action RPG as possible" or something along those lines...But "it's an action rpg" was definately in the statement lol.

Modifié par Aradace, 09 septembre 2010 - 12:55 .

[Lumikki]

Faz432 wrote...

I'm not complaining or being delusional, I'm just suggesting why the length of a game might be a factor in how good it is and when you think about a 'epic masterpiece' like Dragon Age markets itself, I think that's fair not to end up with a short knock off which many people fear DA2 might be.

Leght is so relative term.  If You buy shorter movie than some what is more longer, does it automaticly means the movie what last longer is better. If you buy with 10 buck to something and get something, then buy with 20 buck get something what last longer. Is the 10 buck worst than 20 buck stuff.

I can understand that something can be too short and leave person like I did not get into mood, because it was so short. *mm* Other hand it can also means because it lasted so long, I lost the interest, it was just too long to keep the interest so long.

It's not the lenght what defines is something good, but the quality of that time.

Modifié par Lumikki, 09 septembre 2010 - 02:36 .

[Aradace]

Lumikki wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

I'm not complaining or being delusional, I'm just suggesting why the length of a game might be a factor in how good it is and when you think about a 'epic masterpiece' like Dragon Age markets itself, I think that's fair not to end up with a short knock off which many people fear DA2 might be.

Leght is so relative term.  If You buy shorter movie than some what is more longer, does it automaticly means the movie what last longer is better. If you buy with 10 buck to something and get something, then buy with 20 buck get something what last longer. Is the 10 buck worst than 20 buck stuff.

I can understand that something can be too short and leave person like I did get to mood, because it was so short. *mm* Other hand it can also means because it lasted so long, I lost the interest, it was just too long to keep the interest so long.

It's not the lenght what defines is somehting good, but the quality of that time. Is lenght factor, maybe sometimes, but it's it the major factor. More money you spend more you get, that's lenght, but it also cost more.

And that's the point some people fail to grasp.  Some folks complaining here are automatically assuming, yes I said ASSUMING lol, that because it's going to be shorter that it's going to be of lesser quality by default.  You seem to have it pretty much nailed though:  If it still turns out to be a damn great game, then why should it matter if it's 30 hours or 130 hours? Bottom line, wait until March 8th before we have anything conclusive.

[FDrage]

Aradace wrote...

That's strait from a couple of the EA/BioWare guys during an interview recently on X-Play.
It was something along the lines of "We're trying to make it as great an Action RPG as possible" or something along those lines...But "it's an action rpg" was definately in the statement lol.

Yes, I understand that .. however if some from Bioware clasify DA:O as an "Action RPG" (which I don't ... because Action in that sense for me is far far \\way from what DA:O was) then applying that same term to DA2 ... doesn't mean as much as there doesn't seem to be a commen understanding what "Action" means in that regard.

[Aradace]

FDrage wrote...

Aradace wrote...

That's strait from a couple of the EA/BioWare guys during an interview recently on X-Play.
It was something along the lines of "We're trying to make it as great an Action RPG as possible" or something along those lines...But "it's an action rpg" was definately in the statement lol.

Yes, I understand that .. however if some from Bioware clasify DA:O as an "Action RPG" (which I don't ... because Action in that sense for me is far far \\\\\\\\way from what DA:O was) then applying that same term to DA2 ... doesn't mean as much as there doesn't seem to be a commen understanding what "Action" means in that regard.

I wish I had remembered their names but I kind of agree....However seeing as how there have been no Devs or any other "employee" to come forward to deny the claim, it's safe to assume that it could very well be an "action RPG" 

Modifié par Aradace, 09 septembre 2010 - 01:18 .

[Monica83]

Well i think dragon age 2 have many stepbacks from Origins...

-No race selection-

-No origins story-

-Static class in order to keep things "Distinct"-



im' just worryed about that i miss title like baldur's gate 2 title with a great roleplayability i tryed mass effect 2 and since ok is nice but is nothing if you compare it to BG2 in terms of roleplayability.. If i want a game full of action and with cinematic video i buy Metal gear solid 4.. I loved the opportunity to create a character and living the story on a deep world full of information.. I enjoyed so much meet the other companions.. Take my choices during the game.. In fact origins storyes are maded to teach you how things go in Dragon Age... Origins story introduce you in the world of game give you the opportunity to understeand your race and what civilization thinks of that.. Now with dragon age 2 you play with a partial predefinite character they cutted off many things they changed classes and maded them mor static.. In this is only in order to "copy" mass effect 2 and add a voiced character and cinematic cutscene... Yes i'm worried it's sad if a great company like bioware decide to follow the casual gamer way of Rpg....

This is really sad

[mr_nameless]

Electronic game RPGs are a poor excuse to replace table top games.

Get some friends, some booz, as a game master I can have you take on a storyline that lasts 1000 hours and beat anything that even Bioware can come up in originality, content, and fun. Video games, what a waste of money.

[Aradace]

mr_nameless wrote...

Electronic game RPGs are a poor excuse to replace table top games.
Get some friends, some booz, as a game master I can have you take on a storyline that lasts 1000 hours and beat anything that even Bioware can come up in originality, content, and fun. Video games, what a waste of money.

Then why in the nine hells are you even here if they're a "waste of money" lol....By even posting here that automatically makes you a hypocrite.

[Gerudan]

javierabegazo wrote...

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

Length defines, how long you can enjoy the quality of a game, so the longer the game with a constant high quality is, the more quality gameplay you get out of it in the end. 

And this is the first time I've read, that DA2 is shorter than DA:O and I don't like it. I hope it is at least as long as ME2 and not some 20h short game, that would be far too short for a good RPG, because it needs time to tell a good story with good characters (Mafia 2 anyone?). 

[ObserverStatus]

I don't know what you mean by "Adventure Game" but if they're adding more exploration content, than I'm all for it.

[eucatastrophe]

Gerudan wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

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

Length defines, how long you can enjoy the quality of a game, so the longer the game with a constant high quality is, the more quality gameplay you get out of it in the end. 

And this is the first time I've read, that DA2 is shorter than DA:O and I don't like it. I hope it is at least as long as ME2 and not some 20h short game, that would be far too short for a good RPG, because it needs time to tell a good story with good characters (Mafia 2 anyone?). 

Well said.
I thought Dragon Age was the perfect balance for the Length rocks/Length sucks debate. 
One can draw it out, or one can just do the main quests and still beat the game.

You can't make a longer game out of a short one, but that is typically not true for the inverse.

Modifié par eucatastrophe, 09 septembre 2010 - 04:36 .

[Aradace]

eucatastrophe wrote...

Gerudan wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

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

Length defines, how long you can enjoy the quality of a game, so the longer the game with a constant high quality is, the more quality gameplay you get out of it in the end. 

And this is the first time I've read, that DA2 is shorter than DA:O and I don't like it. I hope it is at least as long as ME2 and not some 20h short game, that would be far too short for a good RPG, because it needs time to tell a good story with good characters (Mafia 2 anyone?). 

Well said.
I thought Dragon Age was the perfect balance for the Length rocks/Length sucks debate. 
One can draw it out, or one can just do the main quests and still beat the game.

You can't make a longer game out of a short one, but that is typically not true for the inverse.

And now we're back to square one....It's like some of you havent even fricking paid attention to the last few pages....A shorter game does NOT automatically mean it's going to be bad...Until the game is released, seriously, just stfu complaining about how long it's going to be.