1279 réponses à ce sujet

[Sneelonz]

I stopped reading it after he said "Hawk".

[Brockololly]

errant_knight wrote...
Uh, no. It means that the things the reviewer found to be exciting improvements, I didn't, and yet he is clearly excited. That is undeniable. And further, that he is not the first reviewer to also be excited by things that I find unappealing. Perhaps I overstated the case in the name of snappy rhetoric, but that doesn't change the fact that while both you and the reviewer found the things in the article to be positives, not everyone must do so, or have it be seen that they lack comprehension/reading skills.

Right- I just hate how most of these preview articles latch on to the Mass Effectication of DA as some glorious thing everyone should be happy about. I enjoyed ME well enough but not everyone that liked DA liked ME. Portraying the changes to DA as being basically injecting some Shepard or ME into DA might win over some people but you're likely just as apt to lose the interest of just as many people that want DA and ME to remain two entirely different types of games and not blended into some stylistically homogenous goo.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Brockololly wrote...

errant_knight wrote...
Uh, no. It means that the things the reviewer found to be exciting improvements, I didn't, and yet he is clearly excited. That is undeniable. And further, that he is not the first reviewer to also be excited by things that I find unappealing. Perhaps I overstated the case in the name of snappy rhetoric, but that doesn't change the fact that while both you and the reviewer found the things in the article to be positives, not everyone must do so, or have it be seen that they lack comprehension/reading skills.

Right- I just hate how most of these preview articles latch on to the Mass Effectication of DA as some glorious thing everyone should be happy about. I enjoyed ME well enough but not everyone that liked DA liked ME. Portraying the changes to DA as being basically injecting some Shepard or ME into DA might win over some people but you're likely just as apt to lose the interest of just as many people that want DA and ME to remain two entirely different types of games and not blended into some stylistically homogenous goo.

And yet they wonder where all the "Why are you guys Mass Effecting Dragon Age" Posts come from. Go fig right?

[errant_knight]

The sad part is that every time I start to feel more positive about things because of listening to what writers like David Gaider and Mary Kirby have to say--I have faith in the writing--something like this comes out and undoes it all.

Modifié par errant_knight, 18 septembre 2010 - 05:01 .

[HopHazzard]

Sneelonz wrote...

I stopped reading it after he said "Hawk".

I almost stopped when I got to 'mano-amano', but somehow managed to finish the thing. Not only does he not know how to spell mano a mano, he clearly has no idea what it means.

[Gerudan]

Well, I'm just playing ME2 in this very moment on my X-Box (I play DA in my PC, though) and...I mean ME2 is a great game and for me, Bioware games are all about story and characters and not so much about tactical group combat or something like that.



And the preview...I don't know, they can't even write Hawke's name right...

[Merced256]

Yikes....

Mike Laidlaw: “There’s still lots of opportunity to meet and talk to
your characters and things like that. I want to play through the most
important moments in this one character’s life. That gives us a nice
filter to hold each event and plot up against. ‘Is this significant?
Does this advance the themes of the game in some way?’”

This was always my greatest fear when i first read the game would span 10 years. This implies it might possibly be a disjointed set of missions you choose to take from the normand... err Kirkwall. Snarkyness aside, i really hope the game flows as well or better than DA:O did. Which i doubt, in DA:O you could totally feel and expect that from start to finish it took you two years in game time to reach that final battle. I don't see how its possible to have good flow when you're spreading an admittedly shorter game over the span of 10 years. Its as if the narration will be "and after hawke did blah blah blah a few years later he did yadi yadi yaaah." Also, if you're only hitting the significants momments in hawke's life, then won't that be kinda.. you know.. incredibly linear?

“I still wanted to keep that element of RPG, that sense of exploration,
progression, sidequests, looting, all that stuff is key, and losing that
would be a shame. To me, this is really exciting because we can get
even less linear, and less predetermined.”

Can we expect these sidequests to be handled similarly to how they were in ME2? As i recall, most all of ME2's sidequests were just tacked on objectives to the main reason you were in a specific location. Other than the squad specific ones of course, which.. nvm i'm bitter about how that was done.

But, as with Origins, there’s no morality system to pigeonhole your
choices. “For me,” says Mike Darreth, “by us not applying our moral
stance to you, the choices become more meaningful. We’re not telling you
this is good or evil – ultimately in the real world, no one thinks
they’re evil, no one thinks they’re good. Everyone thinks they’re doing
things for a justifiable reason.” My justifiable reasons are usually
that I’m an awesome mega-hero and anyone who says otherwise can shut the
hell up: trust BioWare to accommodate me in this endeavour.

I like this approach a lot, and coupled with the new rival/friend system your followers are on, it gives players even more freedom to choose how they would react. I hate people who play their characters to fit the mold of paragon or renegade type of thing. Because no one, not evne a mythical super hero should ever realistically fall firmly under one of those two archetypes. Even our most revered heroes of legend were jerks to someone at some point.

Overall i'm sure it will be a good game, but i'm afraid of dragon effect.

[errant_knight]

Gerudan wrote...

Well, I'm just playing ME2 in this very moment on my X-Box (I play DA in my PC, though) and...I mean ME2 is a great game and for me, Bioware games are all about story and characters and not so much about tactical group combat or something like that.

And the preview...I don't know, they can't even write Hawke's name right...

You illustrated just one of the reasons why many DA:O fans are dismayed quite nicely.

Modifié par errant_knight, 18 septembre 2010 - 05:34 .

[Merced256]

Brockololly wrote...

errant_knight wrote...
Uh, no. It means that the things the reviewer found to be exciting improvements, I didn't, and yet he is clearly excited. That is undeniable. And further, that he is not the first reviewer to also be excited by things that I find unappealing. Perhaps I overstated the case in the name of snappy rhetoric, but that doesn't change the fact that while both you and the reviewer found the things in the article to be positives, not everyone must do so, or have it be seen that they lack comprehension/reading skills.

Right- I just hate how most of these preview articles latch on to the Mass Effectication of DA as some glorious thing everyone should be happy about. I enjoyed ME well enough but not everyone that liked DA liked ME. Portraying the changes to DA as being basically injecting some Shepard or ME into DA might win over some people but you're likely just as apt to lose the interest of just as many people that want DA and ME to remain two entirely different types of games and not blended into some stylistically homogenous goo.

I agree completely. This is generally where'd i go on about the death of CRPGs and how the console market is blah blahing. But the sad truth is that its all of bioware's own doing.

[Gerudan]

errant_knight wrote...

You illustrated just one of the reasons why many DA:O fans are dismayed quite nicely.

I think, DA2 will be as tactical as DA:O was, but I don't necessarily need it to be like that. 

[Monica83]

A sad day for the old RPG lovers... All is got to be more easy even the dialogues with this whell... or Paraphrasing sistem.... All the choice they maded limit only roleplay...

Forcing us to play as a human

Pharaphrasing System blaah

Static classes only to keep them Distinct..

Thanks bioware to make a nice CRPG first and make becoming it a console game for casual gamers...



Since bioware if you want things Distinct.. begins to bring Dragon age and Mass Effect distinct...

I loved dragon age isn't perfect but... well its a wind of freish air when anyone make simple rpg with poor features and bad freedom of roleplay..I don't want a dragon effect i want a dragon age i can talk also for many my friend that don't post in this forum..Let's keep them Distinct...



Since dragon age is far to be an rpg...

Its a medium shooter with a great story..Maybe an action adventure game but not a true Rpg like origins was...

I'm starting to beleave bioware want have an Easy Sequel... And i think we have some EA pressure in that...

Marketing is a horrible beast...

Many people go to MCdonals but that don't means MCdonal have nice things to eat....

[Amioran]

errant_knight wrote...

Uh, no. It means that the things the reviewer found to be exciting improvements, I didn't, and yet he is clearly excited. That is undeniable. And further, that he is not the first reviewer to also be excited by things that I find unappealing. Perhaps I overstated the case in the name of snappy rhetoric, but that doesn't change the fact that while both you and the reviewer found the things in the article to be positives, not everyone must do so, or have it be seen that they lack comprehension/reading skills.

Still however you don't explain WHAT you don't like about what's written.
But I understand, probably you were one of the only few that really liked for example that to fire an archery talent it took you 1.5 seconds flat before the arrow fired. Or maybe you were one of the only few that really liked what you call "atmosphere" and that was nothing as that, since many things were just filler. A more "bland" landscape doesn't mean that you have less detail, at all. Never heard about symbolic poetry? You could be impressed by how many things can be said with just ONE word.

Or maybe, still, you were one of the few that really liked so much the Warden to never tolerate the fact that he is not there this time, or that you absolutely need more races (this is maybe the only point I also don't like, but I can understand it).

Or, again, that you are so tied to the point of having a warrior carring absolutely a bow and dual-wield also if that could mean having the rogue just a subsidiary fighter, as before. There are two roads here and you cannot have both. I understand that you would like the best of both worlds but reality is not just an issue. Until you don't have all the time you want to spend on everything you would like to include then you must make choices, and I prefer definition and archetypes to just having to carry a bow or whatever.

This just doesn't make sense, must of all from a pure roleplay point of view. If you roleplay a character you want to BE that archetype, not knowing that if you follow another route you will be the same, exact thing. Alas, this was a problem of DAO and I don't care minimally that to have more definition I will have to abide by some rules. This is how things works, you cannot have everything just because you want to, or really expect everything without making choices.

Really all the criticism done to DA2 for now, for what I've seen, is just whining. "I want this" or "I don't like that", but nobody EVER say a PROPER solution to a problem (and not just "it would be good if it was that way"), just what they want. This way it is too easy. I would like too 30 trees with all weapon possible, numerous races with VO for everyone of them, and so on, shame is, the more you do without going in a specific direction, the more you risk to lose yourself, above else when you want to reach the end someday. Rembrandt used to say that the most important thing for a painter is knowing when to stop, and having a precise end. A lack of one of the two is the most probable cause of failure, in every field.

Modifié par Amioran, 18 septembre 2010 - 05:48 .

[The Sauce of Awesome]

See, this is why I don't like reading previews...

[Merced256]

Amioran wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Uh, no. It means that the things the reviewer found to be exciting improvements, I didn't, and yet he is clearly excited. That is undeniable. And further, that he is not the first reviewer to also be excited by things that I find unappealing. Perhaps I overstated the case in the name of snappy rhetoric, but that doesn't change the fact that while both you and the reviewer found the things in the article to be positives, not everyone must do so, or have it be seen that they lack comprehension/reading skills.

Still however you don't explain WHAT you don't like about what's written.
But I understand, probably you were one of the only few that really liked for example that to fire an archery talent it took you 1.5 seconds flat before the arrow fired. Or maybe you were one of the only few that really liked what you call "atmosphere" and that was nothing as that, since many things were just filler. A more "bland" landscape doesn't mean that you have less detail, at all. Never heard about symbolic poetry? You could be impressed by how many things can be said with just ONE word.

Or maybe, still, you were one of the few that really liked so much the Warden to never tolerate the fact that he is not there this time, or that you absolutely need more races (this is maybe the only point I also don't like, but I can understand it).

Or, again, that you are so tied to the point of having a warrior carring absolutely a bow and dual-wield also if that could mean having the rogue just a subsidiary fighter, as before. There are two roads here and you cannot have both. I understand that you would like the best of both worlds but reality is not just an issue. Until you don't have all the time you want to spend on everything you would like to include then you must make choices, and I prefer definition and archetypes to just having to carry a bow or whatever.

This just doesn't make sense, must of all from a pure roleplay point of view. If you roleplay a character you want to BE that archetype, not knowing that if you follow another route you will be the same, exact thing. Alas, this was a problem of DAO and I don't care minimally that to have more definition I will have to abide by some rules. This is how things works, you cannot have everything just because you want to, or really expect everything without making choices.

Really all the criticism done to DA2 for now, for what I've seen, is just whining. "I want this" or "I don't like that", but nobody EVER say a PROPER solution to a problem (and not just "it would be good if it was that way"), just what they want. This way it is too easy. I would like too 30 trees with all weapon possible, numerous races with VO for everyone of them, and so on, shame is, the more you do without going in a specific direction, the more you risk to lose yourself, above else when you want to reach the end someday.

I like how you know how many people enjoyed specific aspects. What other super powers do you have other than looking like a complete douchebag?

Modifié par Merced256, 18 septembre 2010 - 05:48 .

[Amioran]

Merced256 wrote...


I like how you know how many people enjoyed specific aspects. What other super powers do you have other than looking like a complete douchebag?

Thank you for just proving my point.

So easy, isn't it? You know, logic sometime is not so superflous. If you talk about A in an article and you don't like that A, it is difficult that that's because you don't like B.

Modifié par Amioran, 18 septembre 2010 - 05:52 .

[Merced256]

Amioran wrote...

Merced256 wrote...


I like how you know how many people enjoyed specific aspects. What other super powers do you have other than looking like a complete douchebag?

Thank you for just proving my point.

So easy, isn't it?

For you to make baseless assumptions? Sure is i suppose.

Modifié par Merced256, 18 septembre 2010 - 05:51 .

[Amioran]

Merced256 wrote..

For you to make baseless assumptions? Sure is i suppose.

LOL.

You clearly don't understand. Maybe it's not your fault, but whatever.

You proved my point because you just attacked me saying nothing about what's written about. You can not like it how much you want, still this doesn't mean that you have a point about it.

And btw since you underscored the "few" probably then you are really one of them. If you want I can create you a mod that increase aim time firing archery talents to 30 seconds. Is this more realistic? Or I can create some ambient background that have 1000 trees all being the same calling that atmosphere if you like. Sure it's easier than many other things that you don't like.

Modifié par Amioran, 18 septembre 2010 - 05:58 .

[Monica83]

Ops i maded a mistake...



Since Mass Effect is far to be an rpg...

Its a shooter with a nice story that is what i mean

[Merced256]

Amioran wrote...

Merced256 wrote..

For you to make baseless assumptions? Sure is i suppose.

LOL.

You clearly don't understand. Maybe it's not your fault, but whatever.

You proved my point because you just attacked me saying nothing about what's written about. You can not like it how much you want, still this doesn't mean that you have a point about it.

You're asking me to deconstruct your arugment? If i thought you made one worth breaking down perhaps i would. But assuming things you can't possibly know doesn't lend you any credibility, in fact it detracts from whatever small amount you might have possessed to begin with. I also don't tend to read things that make such stupid assumptions because it leads me to make an assumption, though a informed one. But hey, maybe its not your fault.

[errant_knight]

Amioran wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Uh, no. It means that the things the reviewer found to be exciting improvements, I didn't, and yet he is clearly excited. That is undeniable. And further, that he is not the first reviewer to also be excited by things that I find unappealing. Perhaps I overstated the case in the name of snappy rhetoric, but that doesn't change the fact that while both you and the reviewer found the things in the article to be positives, not everyone must do so, or have it be seen that they lack comprehension/reading skills.

Still however you don't explain WHAT you don't like about what's written.
But I understand, probably you were one of the only few that really liked for example that to fire an archery talent it took you 1.5 seconds flat before the arrow fired. Or maybe you were one of the only few that really liked what you call "atmosphere" and that was nothing as that, since many things were just filler. A more "bland" landscape doesn't mean that you have less detail, at all. Never heard about symbolic poetry? You could be impressed by how many things can be said with just ONE word.

Or maybe, still, you were one of the few that really liked so much the Warden to never tolerate the fact that he is not there this time, or that you absolutely need more races (this is maybe the only point I also don't like, but I can understand it).

Or, again, that you are so tied to the point of having a warrior carring absolutely a bow and dual-wield also if that could mean having the rogue just a subsidiary fighter, as before. There are two roads here and you cannot have both. I understand that you would like the best of both worlds but reality is not just an issue. Until you don't have all the time you want to spend on everything you would like to include then you must make choices, and I prefer definition and archetypes to just having to carry a bow or whatever.

This just doesn't make sense, must of all from a pure roleplay point of view. If you roleplay a character you want to BE that archetype, not knowing that if you follow another route you will be the same, exact thing. Alas, this was a problem of DAO and I don't care minimally that to have more definition I will have to abide by some rules. This is how things works, you cannot have everything just because you want to, or really expect everything without making choices.

Really all the criticism done to DA2 for now, for what I've seen, is just whining. "I want this" or "I don't like that", but nobody EVER say a PROPER solution to a problem (and not just "it would be good if it was that way"), just what they want. This way it is too easy. I would like too 30 trees with all weapon possible, numerous races with VO for everyone of them, and so on, shame is, the more you do without going in a specific direction, the more you risk to lose yourself, above else when you want to reach the end someday. Rembrandt used to say that the most important thing for a painter is knowing when to stop, and having a precise end. A lack of one of the two is the most probable cause of failure, in every field.

See, there's a reason I didn't address your points one by one. I got the impression from your earlier posts that it wouldn't be worth my time unless I was in a mood to toss unprovoked sarcasm, and likely feces, back and forth, and you've proved me right. You're expressing yourself in a way that is both condescending, and completely unaccepting of the possibility that one could disagree with you without being a whining fool. That's not a good way to encourage respectful dialogue, and I'm not going to bother to try.

Modifié par errant_knight, 18 septembre 2010 - 06:02 .

[Gerudan]

Monica83 wrote...

Ops i maded a mistake...

Since Mass Effect is far to be an rpg...
Its a shooter with a nice story that is what i mean

And what makes an rpg  an rpg? 

Modifié par Gerudan, 18 septembre 2010 - 06:03 .

[foodstuffs]

Gerudan wrote...

And what makes an rpg  an rpg?

Cookies.

EDIT: (not actually directed to the person I quoted)  In all seriousness, RPG probably covers the broadest range of video games/gaming.  Deus Ex, for example, is an RPG.  As was Blood Omen.  So, too, are DA:O and the BG series.  There is also Diablo.  One could even argue Star Craft is, if one were so inclined.  So my question is, what makes a game not an RPG?

Modifié par foodstuffs, 18 septembre 2010 - 06:21 .

[mellifera]

Amioran wrote...
Still however you don't explain WHAT you don't like about what's written.
But I understand, probably you were one of the only few that really liked for example that to fire an archery talent it took you 1.5 seconds flat before the arrow fired. Or maybe you were one of the only few that really liked what you call "atmosphere" and that was nothing as that, since many things were just filler. A more "bland" landscape doesn't mean that you have less detail, at all. Never heard about symbolic poetry? You could be impressed by how many things can be said with just ONE word.

Or maybe, still, you were one of the few that really liked so much the Warden to never tolerate the fact that he is not there this time, or that you absolutely need more races (this is maybe the only point I also don't like, but I can understand it).

Or, again, that you are so tied to the point of having a warrior carring absolutely a bow and dual-wield also if that could mean having the rogue just a subsidiary fighter, as before. There are two roads here and you cannot have both. I understand that you would like the best of both worlds but reality is not just an issue. Until you don't have all the time you want to spend on everything you would like to include then you must make choices, and I prefer definition and archetypes to just having to carry a bow or whatever.

This just doesn't make sense, must of all from a pure roleplay point of view. If you roleplay a character you want to BE that archetype, not knowing that if you follow another route you will be the same, exact thing. Alas, this was a problem of DAO and I don't care minimally that to have more definition I will have to abide by some rules. This is how things works, you cannot have everything just because you want to, or really expect everything without making choices.

Really all the criticism done to DA2 for now, for what I've seen, is just whining. "I want this" or "I don't like that", but nobody EVER say a PROPER solution to a problem (and not just "it would be good if it was that way"), just what they want. This way it is too easy. I would like too 30 trees with all weapon possible, numerous races with VO for everyone of them, and so on, shame is, the more you do without going in a specific direction, the more you risk to lose yourself, above else when you want to reach the end someday. Rembrandt used to say that the most important thing for a painter is knowing when to stop, and having a precise end. A lack of one of the two is the most probable cause of failure, in every field.

I pretty much agree with this. Why is it that people are acting like having too many choices isn't a potentially bad thing? Just look at the post-Landsmeet events in DAO. There is a huge lack of reaction to the choices you make, even though people reacted to way lesser with more emotion toward the beginning of the game. If having less choices (but still having them!) means I can get actual reactions and responses from the NPCs and seeing their effect beyond a few sentences on a slide show at the end, I'm all for it. To be totally cliche, I prefer quality over quantity. Choices are irrelevant if you have so many that they have no real effect (just look at the boons and stuff in Awakening, or how no one really gives a hoot if you're queen or king consort, or when you get Alistair executed or exiled or let him sacrifice himself and your companions at the post coronation are just like "LOL U R HERO NAO!11"). There are so many responses that are made generic to fit all choices, if playing as one dude or lady helps me get rid of that, then I don't have a problem with that.

Modifié par yukidama, 18 septembre 2010 - 06:21 .

[Tsuga C]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

errant_knight wrote...
Uh, no. It means that the things the reviewer found to be exciting improvements, I didn't, and yet he is clearly excited. That is undeniable. And further, that he is not the first reviewer to also be excited by things that I find unappealing. Perhaps I overstated the case in the name of snappy rhetoric, but that doesn't change the fact that while both you and the reviewer found the things in the article to be positives, not everyone must do so, or have it be seen that they lack comprehension/reading skills.

Right- I just hate how most of these preview articles latch on to the Mass Effectication of DA as some glorious thing everyone should be happy about. I enjoyed ME well enough but not everyone that liked DA liked ME. Portraying the changes to DA as being basically injecting some Shepard or ME into DA might win over some people but you're likely just as apt to lose the interest of just as many people that want DA and ME to remain two entirely different types of games and not blended into some stylistically homogenous goo.

And yet they wonder where all the "Why are you guys Mass Effecting Dragon Age" Posts come from. Go fig right?

Oh, they know perfectly well the wheres and whys of the situation, but the ones who truly value the DA:O style of play and depth aren't the ones calling all the shots.  Do they have influence?  Probably.  Do they have as much influence as we grognards would like?  Not by a long shot.  They're EAWare now and catering to the ADHD crowd appears to be the corporate game plan.

As noted earlier by several people, combos for non-mages, rapid response times, and such are legitimate improvements.  However, the ME and DA series should most certainly *NOT* be homogenized and simplified for the sake of the Konsole Kiddies.