250 réponses à ce sujet

[Bryy_Miller]

errant_knight wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

shnizzler93 wrote...

BrotherWarth wrote...

I remember that. Every preview that came out said how great the shooting was, how fluid the combat felt compared to the first, and how the powers were more useful. But they never said anything about the RPG elements being improved. People starting getting nervous about ME2 being described as a shooter. Bioware kept saying that nothing was being changed or removed, the combat was just being made better. Then previews started getting more in-depth. People found out about the dumbed-down leveling system and lack of customizable weapons and armor. Bioware still insisted that it was going to be just like ME1 with better combat. Then people found out that was no inventory system and that the game was shorter than ME1. But Bioware stil insisted it was the same as ME1 but with better combat. Well, that was obviously untrue. Completely untrue. Now all we see and hear of DA2 is telling the same story, but Bioware keeps saying its the same as DAO but with better combat. I'm not making this topic to call Bioware liars and whine. I'm making it because some people are so vehemently opposed to any criticism of the game and consider anything but praise and adoration for Bioware blasphemy.
It should be pretty obvious at this point that we're not actually going to get DAO with better combat. It really is 'Dragon Effect'. The Lead Designer for Origins turned down the job for DA2 because he didn't like the direction they decided to take it and even left Bioware after 10 years because he didn't like what Bioware has become. So can't people be on the fence or even against DA2 without being called whiners, fanboys, misinformed, or any other insults?

1)  That depends on your play style. For me, Mass Effect 2 was several hours longer
2) Naturally, this is by the same company, so of course there will be at least some minor bleed-over. Also, whether or not this happens, it could be good or bad, depending on what you prefer
3) Where and when did you hear this?

He got it from the guy's blog. While it does state that he left because he did not like the type of RPG Dragon Age 2 was looking like, it's not the doom and gloom story that Warth presents. 

I went and read it. It's restrained, he doesn't bash anyone, and he doesn't say that it's bad in any way,  but he makes it clear that he left because the game it was shaping up to be wasn't the type of game he wanted to work on, unlike DA:O.

And these things happen all the time. Like Gaider said, it's not ultimate proof that DA2 is going to be undeniably a bad game, nor that BioWare has become an evil empire. It was a guy going with his gut, and I very much doubt he's going to be out of a job very long (or that being unemployed is that huge an inconvenience for him).

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 07 octobre 2010 - 03:01 .

[errant_knight]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In case anyone thinks this is an empty promise, I'd like to point out the DAO actually did this.  We got features in DAO we hadn't seen for years.  We got full tactical control of the whole party (something not seen since BG2).  We got a traditional fantasy setting (something not seen since NWN).  DAO did return to features previously abandoned.

This is the best news ever, and even more so since what you say is true.

It occurs to me that we already know one way in which DA2 is doing this, as well.

There's no camp.  In DAO (and ME, JE, KotOR, NWN, BG2) all your companions hang out in one spot until you need them.  But in BG, there was no camp.  I always thought the camp was silly, and it produced some absurd consequences.  And finally in DA2 they're getting rid of it.

I liked the camp, because it made me feel like we were really on the road together. If we aren't, then there's no need for it. I preferred to trigger conversations outside of camp for the most part, anyway. As long as they'll talk to me whenever I click on them, instead of giving me the brush off like in Awakening and Witch Hunt, I don't really care where conversations occur. But when travelling over long distances, I think camp makes sense. It adds to that feeling of a long journey.

[errant_knight]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

shnizzler93 wrote...

BrotherWarth wrote...

I remember that. Every preview that came out said how great the shooting was, how fluid the combat felt compared to the first, and how the powers were more useful. But they never said anything about the RPG elements being improved. People starting getting nervous about ME2 being described as a shooter. Bioware kept saying that nothing was being changed or removed, the combat was just being made better. Then previews started getting more in-depth. People found out about the dumbed-down leveling system and lack of customizable weapons and armor. Bioware still insisted that it was going to be just like ME1 with better combat. Then people found out that was no inventory system and that the game was shorter than ME1. But Bioware stil insisted it was the same as ME1 but with better combat. Well, that was obviously untrue. Completely untrue. Now all we see and hear of DA2 is telling the same story, but Bioware keeps saying its the same as DAO but with better combat. I'm not making this topic to call Bioware liars and whine. I'm making it because some people are so vehemently opposed to any criticism of the game and consider anything but praise and adoration for Bioware blasphemy.
It should be pretty obvious at this point that we're not actually going to get DAO with better combat. It really is 'Dragon Effect'. The Lead Designer for Origins turned down the job for DA2 because he didn't like the direction they decided to take it and even left Bioware after 10 years because he didn't like what Bioware has become. So can't people be on the fence or even against DA2 without being called whiners, fanboys, misinformed, or any other insults?

1)  That depends on your play style. For me, Mass Effect 2 was several hours longer
2) Naturally, this is by the same company, so of course there will be at least some minor bleed-over. Also, whether or not this happens, it could be good or bad, depending on what you prefer
3) Where and when did you hear this?

He got it from the guy's blog. While it does state that he left because he did not like the type of RPG Dragon Age 2 was looking like, it's not the doom and gloom story that Warth presents. 

I went and read it. It's restrained, he doesn't bash anyone, and he doesn't say that it's bad in any way,  but he makes it clear that he left because the game it was shaping up to be wasn't the type of game he wanted to work on, unlike DA:O.

And these things happen all the time. Like Gaider said, it's not ultimate proof that DA2 is going to be undeniably a bad game, nor that BioWare has become an evil empire.

No, but it is proof that the differences between DA:O and DA2 are significant enough for a guy to leave the job he'd had for ten years--a better job than I'll ever have. Whether or not one would agree with him is a separate point, but it does show a certain strength of feeling about it.

And I've never said that I thought DA2 would be a bad game, just that it might well be a game I won't like. Doesn't mean others won't. In fact, people who liked ME2 more than DA:O will probably think it's much improved. I'm just not one of those people.

Modifié par errant_knight, 07 octobre 2010 - 03:05 .

[Bryy_Miller]

errant_knight wrote...
No, but it is proof that the differences between DA:O and DA2 are significant enough for a guy to leave the job he'd had for ten years

Well, yeah. It's just not a doom and gloom story.

And I've never said that I thought DA2 would be a bad game, just that it might well be a game I won't like.

I never said you thought it would be a bad game, I was just making a point. Someone asked about the Brent question, is all.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 07 octobre 2010 - 03:16 .

[Brockololly]

errant_knight wrote...
No, but it is proof that the differences between DA:O and DA2 are significant enough for a guy to leave the job he'd had for ten years--a better job than I'll ever have. Whether or not one would agree with him is a separate point, but it does show a certain strength of feeling about it.

I'd also add that Executive Producer of Origins, Dan Tudge left BioWare after the PC version was delayed. I have no clue why he left but still, thats another one of the top people that made Orgins what it is not there any more. Tudge and Knowles seemed to be the types that had sway over the overall direction of the franchise and the games, so...yeah.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Brockololly wrote...

I have no clue why he left

He had a job waiting for him at Disney.  With DAO delayed he could no longer afford to wait for it.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 07 octobre 2010 - 03:59 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Who knows? Presumably some sort of project management.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

I suggest trying to understand what the original post says Instead of jumping around with the same old "Nooooo, ME2 was far better than ME1!" rant. Point here is not whether ME2 was superior or inferior. Point is, there were vast differences other than "overhauled combat system" and we all were in for a big surprise, for better or worse. Which raises concerns related to how different DA2 will be compared to the Origins. Valid concerns. There exist valid reasons to expect DA2 to be much different than DA:O in aspects other than combat as well, based on the ME2 example. There exist NO valid reasons to play the blind zealot when someone raises his concerns over the matter. It is indeed frustrating when your logical deductions are treated as mindless doomsaying, especially when one is talked down to by Orzammar crier wannabes who act like they're being paid for what they do.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Somehow people with another opinion needs to be silenced as fast as possible. Anything goes on that holy quest.

[Shad0wOGRE]

I for one am glad that Bioware makes changes from game to game. All these people who want a game to be exactly like the first drive me nuts. If gaming companies didn't change the way they did things we'd still be playing text-based adventure games without the need for graphics beyond still pictures.



Just because Bioware is making Dragon Age 2 doesn't mean you can't play Dragon Age: Origins anymore.



The thing that makes a role-playing game is choices and a world, full of characters, to make them in, not slow combat, silent protagonists, massive inventories, and whatever else Bioware is changing.



Stop being so afraid of change.

[AlanC9]

Hey, AFW,  all I said was that I wasn't surprised; ME2 turned out about like what I figured the devs were trying to do. So I don't know why Ortaya and the OP -- or you ? -- were surprised.

If you post here people get to critique your point, and I didn't think the OP had much of one. In fairness, it's impossible to give his point a real evaluation because the developer posts that he feels were misleading are no longer available, and he doesn't have a very good idea of what was actually said.

Modifié par AlanC9, 07 octobre 2010 - 05:20 .

[upsettingshorts]

CommanderNuetral wrote...
Stop being so afraid of change.

I don't think the naysayers fear the concept of change so much as they prefer the status quo ante.  They're reactionaries.

In politics that label carries with it some unsavory conoctations, but I think when used to describe to the ever-present CRPG debate it applies rather nicely without being either inaccurate or disparaging.

In the strictest, most absolutely relative terms I can come up with:

Reactionaries:  Want DA2 to be like traditional CRPGs.
Conservatives:  Want DA2 to be like DAO.
Liberals: Want DA2 to be like ME2.
Radicals: Want DA2 to go beyond ME2 in terms of changing the CRPG genre.

The above terms definitions have nothing to do with modern political ideologies and everything to do with how people want the CRPG genre to move in relation to the status quo.   In general, conservatives want to maintain the status quo, liberals want to push it forward and reactionaries and radicals go beyond that in either wanting radical change or radical regression.  Frankly if I had to guess I'd say most people ride the fence between conservative and liberal on the issue of DA2, in general I mean not on the forums - we here tend to be more opinionated and divisive than that.

And the terms apply.  Changing DA2 to a game that resembles, at least in features, something closer to BG2 would definitely be a move towards the status quo ante.  Keeping the sequel as close to its predecessor would be conservative as it maintains the status quo.  As ME2 represents the most recent changes to the CRPG genre, embracing a movement towards bringing DA2 closer to it is liberal, and taking it beyond even ME2's changes into something new is radical.

Make sense?  It's not about fear of change, just that people have preferences.

slimgrin wrote...
Lets try coming up with a new worthless truism. This one has been used to death on these forums.

How's mine?  People can start forming parties to advance their ideological agenda!  Reactionaries can call themselves the Infinity Party for the engine that powered older Bioware games! 

...I'm not actually serious though that idea isn't as far fetched as it sounds.  There is a Groups section.

In any case the thoughts above have been bouncing around in my head for a while, figured I might as well type it out at some point and I can refer to it later.  This  thread seemed like the first good opportunity.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 octobre 2010 - 06:12 .

[nikki191]

to me ME isnt a rpg its a mix of FPS and adventure

[AlanC9]

Couldn't any RPG be described as a mix of some kind of combat system and an adventure game?

[upsettingshorts]

AlanC9 wrote...

Couldn't any RPG be described as a mix of some kind of combat system and an adventure game?

I think the introduction of twitch combat, of any type, is a line that for some constitutes leaving the realm of RPG in some way.  Even if your relative effectiveness with twitch weapons is heavily based in stats (like Oblivion or ME1) it still in many ways relies on the skill of the player.  ME2 pushes that line even further towards twitch-based mechanics.

I like it, especially in the Mass Effect series, because as a decorated space marine and war hero I have a hard time believing he can't shoot a gun really, really well.  Even from the start of the first game on Eden Prime.  In a game like Baldur's Gate 1 where you begin as an anonymous teenager I don't have a hard time accepting that he/she may struggle to wield a blade without training.

That being said, that's one of the few ME2 developments even I - a liberal by my definition above - would very readily concede is a move away from RPG conventions and into the action realm.  I just think it fits the lore of the game better.  Just a preference, though.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 octobre 2010 - 06:11 .

[Felfenix]

DAO and DA2 clearly aren't RPGs, because they aren't fully turn based like Final Fantasy 10. More than one character performing an action at the same time!? WTF is this, Counter Strike!? Damn impatient PC kiddies, dumbing down combat with their real-time combat!

Modifié par Felfenix, 07 octobre 2010 - 07:16 .

[upsettingshorts]

Felfenix wrote...

DAO and DA2 clearly aren't RPGs, because they aren't fully turn based like Final Fantasy 10. More than one character performing an action at the same time!? WTF is this, Counter Strike!? Damn PC kiddies!

Heh. 

Final Fantasy aren't RPGs either, they're turn-based sleep aids.

[Felfenix]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

DAO and DA2 clearly aren't RPGs, because they aren't fully turn based like Final Fantasy 10. More than one character performing an action at the same time!? WTF is this, Counter Strike!? Damn PC kiddies!

Heh. 

Final Fantasy aren't RPGs either, they're turn-based sleep aids.

Impatient PC kiddy! Go play Counter Strike! Key mashers!

[ashwind]

Lol - everyone seems to have a different idea of what RPG elements are

[Sylvius the Mad]

CommanderNuetral wrote...

Stop being so afraid of change.

I'm not afraid of change.  I'm afraid of specific features.

Not all things that are new are bad.

Not all things that are old are good.

[nightcobra]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

CommanderNuetral wrote...

Stop being so afraid of change.

I'm not afraid of change.  I'm afraid of specific features.

Not all things that are new are bad.

Not all things that are old are good.

more like, not all things that are new are something that you'll like/dislike and the same for the old.
what may be bad by your standards may be good for others.

[Sylvius the Mad]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

more like, not all things that are new are something that you'll like/dislike and the same for the old.
what may be bad by your standards may be good for others.

Yes.

That's a far less pejorative claim.