1658 réponses à ce sujet

[Eternal Dust]

Wow, the armor is really ugly. It's looks like it was patched together with the fur of several puppies.

[joriandrake]

Kerilus wrote...

joriandrake wrote...

Kerilus wrote...

joriandrake wrote...

Kerilus wrote...

joriandrake wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Hmmm.....oh my...

Yes, exactly this

Do you not see his later comment? That is not a good, happy sort of "Hmmm.....oh my..."

I decided to ignore that second comment, feels better that way

Then I suggest you remove his quote in your post. That is a bit disrespectful to his opinion. Don't you think so?

those were two seperate comments and I only noticed the second one after I posted my own, so no, its his own fault that he didn't make a single post of his opinion, and was vague

So even after you realized his true opinion, you still persist with intentionally misinterpreting his view? Just for the sake that it "was" vague? My, are you a nice person.

I won't delete (as I can't) or edit a post of mine because of that, and you just wasted about 4-5 posts complaining about how someone else posts

[ViSeiRa]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Regardless of the animations, the justification for the weapons being so big in the first game was that they needed to be identifiable from the high tactical camera angle.

If the camera no longer zooms out as far (and by all accounts, it doesn't), then the need for the oversized weapons is now gone.

Even if DA2 played exactly like DAO, they should still have made the weapons smaller because the reason for their large size has gone away.

I didn't actually know that, 2 handed swords were all oversized in Origins, but they seem to get even bigger in DA2, I never had a problem with mauls, they looked average, but swords were always bulky.

[joriandrake]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

sanadawarrior wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

It doesn't matter if it is the same size as Origins'. The point is it should be SMALLER. They've redone the anims, now it looks faster, plays faster, the sword 'feels' lighter, but it doesn't look as such.

Regardless of the animations, the justification for the weapons being so big in the first game was that they needed to be identifiable from the high tactical camera angle.

If the camera no longer zooms out as far (and by all accounts, it doesn't), then the need for the oversized weapons is now gone.

Even if DA2 played exactly like DAO, they should still have made the weapons smaller because the reason for their large size has gone away.

Unless they liked them like that? This is their game, they shouldn't have to do a damn thing they dont want to.

Then remind me-- why are we having ANY conversation related to BioWare games?

This isn't exactly a conversation, just a few people supporting and opposing any info that comes out, as always. Then comes the part where people start to point at the other "faction" and saying "NO WAI" and starting to target their opinion/taste/personality/grammar/posting style and the snowball fest starts.

[SXOSXO]

I have held out hope that this kind of thing wouldn't be happening to DA2, but now I see it was hopeless all along. I do not dislike action-RPG's, or even action fighters like DMC and God of War, but this is not the type of game I wanted from Dragon Age. Dragon Age was our throwback to RPG's like BG and NWN, but now even this franchise is being catered to the people that prefer button-mashing combat.



Were the console and PC versions two entirely different games, each designed to cater to each platforms' core audiences, I would not care. But we can pretty much assume the primary difference will be in control interface (UI, camera views), not actual gameplay (fast-paced twitchy combat). I'm not against the idea of DA2 becoming more like an action-RPG had it retained its tactical nature and focus, but even with such features, the combat itself just doesn't appeal to me. I don't like the unrealistic jerky movements and dashes, or the unwieldly sized sword that's being used so effortlessly. A large Qunari greatsword like that should have serious weight to it, the combat animation should reflect that. Even a game like The Witcher, which was an action-RPG with some flair to its combat animation, managed to keep the combat rooted in believability. Its sequel, which is becoming even more "action-y" still retains some semblance of physics as far as movement is concerned. On the otherhand, this gameplay footage of DA2 had me expecting Hawke to suddenly pull out guns from her boots and start spinning around while shooting darkspawn. It's hella cool looking, but it just doesn't fit IMHO.



Am I saying DA2 is going to be bad? No. It's probably going to be a good game, as far as games go. A very good game in fact. But will DA2 be a good sequel to DAO? I seriously doubt it. It just doesn't make sense for a sequel to change the core gameplay of a game so much. Those of us that loved DAO would rather see the core gameplay improved, not changed drastically. I've yet to play a Bioware game I didn't like. Even ME2, which dissapointed me with all the loss of RPG aspects still managed to entertain me. And I'll still be buying DA2 for Bioware's great story-telling, but I'll still be left with that feeling of dissapointment, and the burgeoning question in my mind as to "why?" Why change the formula to an already great game rather than just building upon it? Do the Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter fans really have no say in what we'd like? Or are we to forever come 2nd or 3rd to the mass appeal folks?

[javierabegazo]

Alright kerilus and joriandrake



Lets just put it all behind us. I made it clear that I'm a bit unnerved about the whole two-slice-enemy-bursting into blood bit, and I will continue to do so but lets continue to talk about the video with speculation,



@Perfectionist

One more post all-in-caps talking about the "consolization blah blah blah" and you'll recieve a temp ban. We don't need spam in here. Comments like that make genuine concerns less obvious.

[Kerilus]

No, I wasted 4-5 post to try to appeal to a fellow forumite's good nature. Apparently there is little to no such thing to begin with.

[joriandrake]

javierabegazo wrote...

Alright kerilus and joriandrake

Lets just put it all behind us. I made it clear that I'm a bit unnerved about the whole two-slice-enemy-bursting into blood bit, and I will continue to do so but lets continue to talk about the video with speculation,

I believe that one was actually clarified to be due to exaggrated story, the enemy is most likey something similar to what in D&D would be equal to 1HP mob, "grinder spawn"

[aaniadyen]

octoberfire wrote...

Wow, the armor is really ugly. It's looks like it was patched together with the fur of several puppies.

Puppy-skin armor is the only easy way for a begninning evil overlord to get evil points into his wardrobe!

[flamesoul32]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

It doesn't matter if it is the same size as Origins'. The point is it should be SMALLER. They've redone the anims, now it looks faster, plays faster, the sword 'feels' lighter, but it doesn't look as such.

Regardless of the animations, the justification for the weapons being so big in the first game was that they needed to be identifiable from the high tactical camera angle.

If the camera no longer zooms out as far (and by all accounts, it doesn't), then the need for the oversized weapons is now gone.

Even if DA2 played exactly like DAO, they should still have made the weapons smaller because the reason for their large size has gone away.

Well... I completely agree.

...And I completely disagree. Your saying that the reason that the weapons were as big as the were was because of the tactical camera. Please explain because I see no reason that the camera would give a reason for that in any way. The reason the larger weapons are as big as they are in the first game is simply for aestetic reasons...and the fact that two handed weapons must be bigger then one handed weapons.

[Sylvius the Mad]

sanadawarrior wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Regardless of the animations, the justification for the weapons being so big in the first game was that they needed to be identifiable from the high tactical camera angle.

If the camera no longer zooms out as far (and by all accounts, it doesn't), then the need for the oversized weapons is now gone.

Even if DA2 played exactly like DAO, they should still have made the weapons smaller because the reason for their large size has gone away.

Unless they liked them like that? This is their game, they shouldn't have to do a damn thing they dont want to.

It was their justification.  If they have a new justification, I'd like to hear it.

The old one no longer applies (unless it does, in which case that would be good news).

[Epantiras]

Ok, maybe I'm overreacting, but Hawke jumping and swinging that enormous sword at super speed looks ridiculous to me. Maybe people consider battle animations in DA:O too slow (but I personally liked them), but now they are too fast.

[Sylvius the Mad]

flamesoul32 wrote...

...And I completely disagree. Your saying that the reason that the weapons were as big as the were was because of the tactical camera. Please explain because I see no reason that the camera would give a reason for that in any way. The reason the larger weapons are as big as they are in the first game is simply for aestetic reasons

I'm not making this up.  The justification they gave was that the weapons needed to be indentifiable even when the camera was fully zoomed out.

If that was true, and that reason has gone away, then either they have a new reason for large weapons, or they simply forgot to make them smaller.

...and the fact that two handed weapons must be bigger then one handed weapons.

I think the one-handed weapons were also too big.

And all those oversized weapons is also why the character models had such gargantuan hands.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 28 septembre 2010 - 07:16 .

[sanadawarrior]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

sanadawarrior wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

It doesn't matter if it is the same size as Origins'. The point is it should be SMALLER. They've redone the anims, now it looks faster, plays faster, the sword 'feels' lighter, but it doesn't look as such.

Regardless of the animations, the justification for the weapons being so big in the first game was that they needed to be identifiable from the high tactical camera angle.

If the camera no longer zooms out as far (and by all accounts, it doesn't), then the need for the oversized weapons is now gone.

Even if DA2 played exactly like DAO, they should still have made the weapons smaller because the reason for their large size has gone away.

Unless they liked them like that? This is their game, they shouldn't have to do a damn thing they dont want to.

Then remind me-- why are we having ANY conversation related to BioWare games?

We can discuss our liking or not liking of something without acting like things should or shouldnt be a certain way like as if we owned the company, or were funding development of this game.

[joriandrake]

Kerilus wrote...

No, I wasted 4-5 post to try to appeal to a fellow forumite's good nature. Apparently there is little to no such thing to begin with.

and here come the insults



on the other hand something more light and fresh, here come the drums!

[addiction21]

Monica83 wrote...

so we have...
Paraphrase system ala mass effect with tones
Anime style Animations..
Static classes only to keep them distinct...

*epic facepalm*

Still waiting on that explanation of how the DAO classes were not static.

[bsbcaer]

SirShreK wrote...

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

I must have a mental block or something... I just can't get over how big that effing swwod is.

You know what Freud would say, don't you?

Sometimes a sword is just a sword...

[sanadawarrior]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

sanadawarrior wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Regardless of the animations, the justification for the weapons being so big in the first game was that they needed to be identifiable from the high tactical camera angle.

If the camera no longer zooms out as far (and by all accounts, it doesn't), then the need for the oversized weapons is now gone.

Even if DA2 played exactly like DAO, they should still have made the weapons smaller because the reason for their large size has gone away.

Unless they liked them like that? This is their game, they shouldn't have to do a damn thing they dont want to.

It was their justification.  If they have a new justification, I'd like to hear it.

The old one no longer applies (unless it does, in which case that would be good news).

Again, I don't see why they have to justify a damn thing to us, its their game they can make it however they want.

[joriandrake]

aaniadyen wrote...

octoberfire wrote...

Wow, the armor is really ugly. It's looks like it was patched together with the fur of several puppies.

Puppy-skin armor is the only easy way for a begninning evil overlord to get evil points into his wardrobe!

It is only cool if it is out of dalmatian skin [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/wizard.png[/smilie]

Epantiras wrote...

Ok, maybe I'm overreacting, but Hawke jumping and swinging that enormous sword at super speed looks ridiculous to me. Maybe people consider battle animations in DA:O too slow (but I personally liked them), but now they are too fast.

Question: What did you think of the Warden jumping on dragons and troll earlier in DA1 then?

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I'm not making this up.  The justification they gave was that the weapons needed to be indentifiable even when the camera was fully zoomed out.

If that was true, and that reason has gone away, then either they have a new reason for large weapons, or they simply forgot to make them smaller.

How about "because it looks awesome." That is, in most cases, a good enough reason for a certain art direction in my eyes.

[Anacronian Stryx]

God lord..good thing GoG.com announced there going to release Planescape Torment.

[aaniadyen]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

sanadawarrior wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Regardless of the animations, the justification for the weapons being so big in the first game was that they needed to be identifiable from the high tactical camera angle.

If the camera no longer zooms out as far (and by all accounts, it doesn't), then the need for the oversized weapons is now gone.

Even if DA2 played exactly like DAO, they should still have made the weapons smaller because the reason for their large size has gone away.

Unless they liked them like that? This is their game, they shouldn't have to do a damn thing they dont want to.

It was their justification.  If they have a new justification, I'd like to hear it.

The old one no longer applies (unless it does, in which case that would be good news).

Laidlaw said they were working on the new camera, trying to get it identical to Origins. He said things were looking good so far, just not finished yet.

[ViSeiRa]

sanadawarrior wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

sanadawarrior wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Regardless of the animations, the justification for the weapons being so big in the first game was that they needed to be identifiable from the high tactical camera angle.

If the camera no longer zooms out as far (and by all accounts, it doesn't), then the need for the oversized weapons is now gone.

Even if DA2 played exactly like DAO, they should still have made the weapons smaller because the reason for their large size has gone away.

Unless they liked them like that? This is their game, they shouldn't have to do a damn thing they dont want to.

It was their justification.  If they have a new justification, I'd like to hear it.

The old one no longer applies (unless it does, in which case that would be good news).

Again, I don't see why they have to justify a damn thing to us, its their game they can make it however they want.

And which one of us in these posts implied otherwise? Devs need that kind of feedback, especially at this middle stage of development when such things can stil be changed and/or tweaked.