539 réponses à ce sujet

[Lyssistr]

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

BioWare is just preparing the fanbase for JE2 with all the talk of "action rpg."

gawd, I hope the empire doesn't strike back. I literally fell asleep while playing JE on a couple of occasions and the left the game in peace. Anything but a JE sequel 

[Ryzaki]

TrackerTrem wrote...

So it's like Kingdom hearts?

Depends I actually like KHs combat and for the setting it makes sense.

...DA ninja rogues make me facepalm though.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 novembre 2010 - 04:00 .

[Meltemph]

I dunno, I personally, never found BG or any DnD/CRPG game that complex. When I think of complex I think of Master of Orion(Which I love) or something similar. I don't enjoy games that BW makes for its complexity and really don't get why people do buy them for that. I understand people wanting a game to stay as customizable as possible, since that is a gameplay thing... Oh well.

Modifié par Meltemph, 04 novembre 2010 - 04:02 .

[Monica83]

Voiced character: per se isn't a limitation if you don't change dialogues

Dialog Wheels: Works with paraphrasic sistem.. the paraphrasic system allows you to select only in a globan line what your character is going to say.. At that point create a your character don't have any sense if you don't have the complete control of what you are going to say.. Old style rpg like bg two offers different option of dialogues and you can stay sure because you read your answer and thats is what your character is going to say so you have more control and the character is more your... Paraphrasic schematic system works well with games that have a static predefined character like the witcher where you are Geralt of Rivia but in a game where you create your character its only a limitation..



Faster combat: Again its not bad if stay in the tones and dont ruin the atmosphere of the game,, If i see my character with a two handed sword move them like a knife and kill 7 ennemy with an hit.. well... this is ridicolus to see... Since the animation design of dragon age 2 looks like much more lineage 2 or dinasty warrior.. In a dark mature atmosphere see caartoonish animation like that ruins the atmosphere and the exageration in this case broke the immersion in the game world...



Streamlizes include:

Make stupid schematic sidequest like the ones of the chantry of dragon age origins..

Kill that

Save that

Take that...

Nothing compared with the awesome and deep sidequest of Baldur's gate..



Static classes:

In order to keep the class distinct bioware changed the classes with no logical restriction in terms of roleplay but only for gameplay.. They are distinct yes but now MUCH MORE static even if you can upgrade your skill ((where i seen that before? ooh mass effect 2))...



Contents:

If you take Dragon age.. and Baldurs gate and you compare them.. BG have more monsters.. more spells.. more stuff to find... different place to visit..different artstyle in anyplace you visit.. ((dungeons always different ecc)) more dialogues.. moore sidequests.. more thing to discover...



And in all that if you imagine that Dragon age 2 is shorten tha origin what can be? A streamlized game with much more action and a nice story ((mass effect2??))

[Lyssistr]

AlanC9 wrote...

Lyssistr wrote...
....still if a franchise is about being the spiritual successor to BG, it's a reasonable to expect it to play similarly, not the same but similarly.

But what counts as "similarly," and what about DA2 wouldn't be "similar"?

 Look, we can discuss this all day and always catch each other on phrasing, you can't define a mathematical metric to measure "how far" two game are and at the end you'd need a bunch of law-makers to define similarity very strictly.

 However, I think it's pretty clear BG wasn't an aRPG.

Modifié par Lyssistr, 04 novembre 2010 - 04:07 .

[AlanC9]

Lyssistr wrote...

 However, when mob variety is reduced, tactics get simplified etc, is that literally streamlining, or is it an oversimplification that makes the game less interesting?

Huh? Has someone been going around claiming that this would be "streamlining"? I'm calling strawman here unless you can show me what you're talking about.

[Lyssistr]

Meltemph wrote...

I dunno, I personally, never found BG or any DnD/CRPG game that complex. When I think of complex I think of Master of Orion(Which I love) or something similar. I don't enjoy games that BW makes for its complexity and really don't get why people do buy them for that. I understand people wanting a game to stay as customizable as possible, since that is a gameplay thing... Oh well.

 Personally, by complexity I refer strictly to combat complexity. Asking why people like combat complexity is like asking why some people prefer C++ to Python, it just happens. I like combat complexity because it adds variety and I like variety.

[Lyssistr]

AlanC9 wrote...

Lyssistr wrote...

 However, when mob variety is reduced, tactics get simplified etc, is that literally streamlining, or is it an oversimplification that makes the game less interesting?

Huh? Has someone been going around claiming that this would be "streamlining"? I'm calling strawman here unless you can show me what you're talking about.

 In this chat no, however people in general often refer to combat streamlining when combat becomes less varied & complex. It is also a trend that's present, e.g. while I liked DAO's combat allot, it would be great to see some types of mobs needing their own&special niche-tactic.

[AtreiyaN7]

Lyssistr wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I've played BIoWare games ever since Baldur's Gate too. I loved all the older games, but one simply can't expect companies and/or games in specific genres not to evolve over time if they are to survive and prosper. If you want the gaming equivalent of a fly trapped in amber that's been preserved in all its glory for millions of years, perfect, eternal and unchanging, then try a museum of natural history - or maybe the Final Fantasy series.

 It's not about Bioware as a whole and their games in general, it's about DA franchise which was supposed to be about reviving cRPGs. It can evolve in many ways, and DA:O included many of them, still if a franchise is about being the spiritual successor to BG, it's a reasonable to expect it to play similarly, not the same but similarly. I mean Diablo III won't be the same as the previous two, albeit they went with design decisions that don't alter the feel of D's franchise.

 Also not all changes are evolutionary, e.g. removing the possibility for a proper top down view e.g. isn't evolving anything, just removing.

DA:O was supposed to the spiritual successor to BG, and it was for the most part. They never made promises about future DA games being in the same vein. My point was simply that games evolve over time, generally that means that games become more refined or improved in some ways like better graphics, different mechanics, smoother gameplay or what-have-you.

This does not imply that every change is good - just that change happens no matter how much we might want some things to stay the same. The Fallout series obviously made a huge graphical leap from Fallout 1 to Fallout 3 while still maintaining a core mechanic like VATS.

EDIT: Woops, forgot to delete that chunk of text.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 04 novembre 2010 - 04:50 .

[AlanC9]

Lyssistr wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Lyssistr wrote...
....still if a franchise is about being the spiritual successor to BG, it's a reasonable to expect it to play similarly, not the same but similarly.

But what counts as "similarly," and what about DA2 wouldn't be "similar"?

 Look, we can discuss this all day and always catch each other on phrasing, you can't define a mathematical metric to measure "how far" two game are and at the end you'd need a bunch of law-makers to define similarity in a very strictly.

I'm not trying to catch you out on language -- if I wanted to play that game I'd go after Monica, though I guess that would be shooting fish in a barrel.

But since there's no universally acceptable definition of "similar," what's the point of saying that DA2 should play "similarly" to BG? It's just empty rhetoric.

 However, I think it's pretty clear BG wasn't an aRPG.

I don't think DA2 will be either. I personally use the definition someone else proposed upthread -- twitch elements are the criterion, and DA2 won't have them.

[Meltemph]

Personally, by complexity I refer strictly to combat complexity. Asking why people like combat complexity is like asking why some people prefer C++ to Python, it just happens. I like combat complexity because it adds variety and I like variety.

Was not actually responding to your post, however...

when mob variety is reduced

It largely depends if the reduced mob variety has more individual variety. Just because you have multiple types of mobs does not mean more complex. Hell, I would say most of the time, it just means there are different types of mobs.

tactics get simplified

Simplified tactics does not mean less complex if there is a lot less time to react to your surroundings, in fact you could argue it actually increases the tactic choices, even if they are simplified.



Either way, it largely depends on preference and not everyones preferences are going to be met, the only thing you can do is judge them based on what they are and not what you want them to be.

[Daerog]

BioWare should make an arcade game or something for DA. Make the combat like the campaign in DoW2 or similar. Like a squadbased Diablo game.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 04 novembre 2010 - 04:15 .

[Monica83]

Oh if bioware make DA3 as an arcade game... you always see an army to fanboy to scream happy and defend them with theyr life...lol

[mellifera]

Monica83 wrote...

Oh if bioware make DA3 as an arcade game... you always see an army to fanboy to scream happy and defend them with theyr life...lol

Yeah, okay. <_<

[AlanC9]

Lyssistr wrote...
 In this chat no, however people in general often refer to combat streamlining when combat becomes less varied & complex. It is also a trend that's present, e.g. while I liked DAO's combat allot, it would be great to see some types of mobs needing their own&special niche-tactic.

I dunno; what I've taken from those threads is that people are opposed to pointless complexity. People talk about the IE games as being complex, but they really weren't. You had a fairly large buff/debuff list to remember but if you could remember them, what to do in any given circumstance didn't take any thought. Hell, two of the loadscreens tell you everything you need to know about mage combat.

[Lyssistr]

AlanC9 wrote...

Lyssistr wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Lyssistr wrote...
....still if a franchise is about being the spiritual successor to BG, it's a reasonable to expect it to play similarly, not the same but similarly.

But what counts as "similarly," and what about DA2 wouldn't be "similar"?

 Look, we can discuss this all day and always catch each other on phrasing, you can't define a mathematical metric to measure "how far" two game are and at the end you'd need a bunch of law-makers to define similarity in a very strictly.

I'm not trying to catch you out on language -- if I wanted to play that game I'd go after Monica, though I guess that would be shooting fish in a barrel.

But since there's no universally acceptable definition of "similar," what's the point of saying that DA2 should play "similarly" to BG? It's just empty rhetoric.

 However, I think it's pretty clear BG wasn't an aRPG.

I don't think DA2 will be either. I personally use the definition someone else proposed upthread -- twitch elements are the criterion, and DA2 won't have them.

 Well for many things there's no universal notion, including "good", "bad", "similar", "tasty", "ugly", yet people as of lately somehow manage to use them. Similarly is similarly, I really can't expand more on that.

 I 'm not holding my breath for DA2's combat tbh, I expect it to be action-like. It will take a bunch of gameplay videos showing RTwP to convince me otherwise.

[upsettingshorts]

Monica83 wrote...

Oh if bioware make DA3 as an arcade game... you always see an army to fanboy to scream happy and defend them with theyr life...lol

Eh, it'd depend.  What would be your an example of an arcade game?

That being said, if Bioware made a game I wasn't looking forward to or had huge doubts about - I just wouldn't post on the forum.  I wouldn't show up and be angry, upset, or disappointed.  That's why I made one thread on the Star Wars: The Old Republic boards and never went back.  That's just me though.

[soteria]

Look, we can discuss this all day and always catch each other on phrasing, you can't define a mathematical metric to measure "how far" two game are and at the end you'd need a bunch of law-makers to define similarity very strictly.

 However, I think it's pretty clear BG wasn't an aRPG.

I thought you said you were leaving.  Back to insist DA2 will be an aRPG and therefore bad?  As I said in the other thread, DA:O was marketed as an action RPG as well.  You seem to have managed to miss the post, so I'll quote myself:

I can't find the Bioware quote about DA:O being an action RPG, but the following is what I found in a google search for "dragon age origins action rpg." All of these descriptions are from previews.

Kotaku:

Combat Options: According to the BioWare guys showing me the game, Dragon Age can be played as a real-time twitch-based action-RPG a la Fable 2. And a player need plumb no deeper than that.

thekoalition, from a preview in E3:

For a medieval type setting (which has been done again and again in rpg’s) this game seems to offer much more depth than many before it. Of course it’s completely different to the likes of Elder Scrolls, because Dragon Age is more of an action rpg, but it just so happens to include a lot of interesting dialog and story pathways.

newsarama,
Penny Arcade Expo, Sept 2009:

The game itself, a third person action-RPG, appears to take a lot of its gameplay cues from Mass Effect over Knights of the Old Republic (two popular Bioware franchises), using almost entirely real-time combat with radial menus, although not in the dialog, which uses a list menu.

Also, Dragon Age is currently listed under Action RPGs on this site... http://www.gamersgat.../rpg/action-rpg
One conclusion that is easy to draw is that obviously those people got the idea that DA:O would be an action RPG from somewhere. I also found articles saying DA:O would "kinda but not really" be an action RPG, quotes that you would have to "think like a wise commander but fight like the guy on the front lines" (sound familiar?), and others vehemently denying that DA:O would be anything like an action RPG. All in all, sounds a lot like the marketing for DA2.

I think the main thing to take away is that people have different definitions of "action RPG." Some people seem to mean it has a lot of combat, others that it has real time combat, others apparently that "you push a button and something happens," and some that you control every aspect of combat (ie, blocking, stabbing, slashing, etc). Trying to draw meaning from someone's statement that a game is "actiony" or an "action-RPG" is stupid unless you already know exactly how they define that term.

[Daerog]

I didn't mean make DA3 an arcade game, I mean arcade game like all those small games you can get off steam or xbox live for like $15 or less.

Edit: Make it like a game between the major releases, like Journeys and this new Legends thing, but bigger and actually cost money.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 04 novembre 2010 - 04:25 .

[Lyssistr]

Meltemph wrote...

Personally, by complexity I refer strictly to combat complexity. Asking why people like combat complexity is like asking why some people prefer C++ to Python, it just happens. I like combat complexity because it adds variety and I like variety.

Was not actually responding to your post, however...

when mob variety is reduced

It largely depends if the reduced mob variety has more individual variety. Just because you have multiple types of mobs does not mean more complex. Hell, I would say most of the time, it just means there are different types of mobs.

tactics get simplified

Simplified tactics does not mean less complex if there is a lot less time to react to your surroundings, in fact you could argue it actually increases the tactic choices, even if they are simplified.

Either way, it largely depends on preference and not everyones preferences are going to be met, the only thing you can do is judge them based on what they are and not what you want them to be.

 well mob variety is a criterion when each mob has its own special abilities, resistances and even more if it needs its own special niche tactic. Ofc if different mobs are just different pixels for the same thing, then nothing changes.

 For tactics, I measure complexity in terms of strategic depth, not in terms of reflexes.

[Monica83]

I know Daerog but i repeat if DA3 will be in that way you can always find an army of fanboys to protect it! lol

[sw33t nothings]

I'm not terrified of the term 'action rpg'. In fact I used to use it to describe DA:O as such before someone decided to tell me that it was a dirty term in a good chunk of the gaming community. But I think as far a generic buzzwords go, it fits. Get a dictionary and look up the etymology of those words. It's not too far off.



Maybe I'm missing something, but in the podcast I didn't really hear anything that made me panic or want to buy DA2 even less. Am I being to sensible?

[Onyx Jaguar]

Monica83 wrote...

Oh if bioware make DA3 as an arcade game... you always see an army to fanboy to scream happy and defend them with theyr life...lol

If Bioware would make an actual Arcade game be it Dragon Age 3 or not I would stand on top of the nearest mountain waving an American Flag with tears running down my face as finally justice has been served at last!

[Meltemph]

For tactics, I measure complexity in terms of strategic depth, not in terms of reflexes.

Reflexes? Less time to react would mean your tactics would have to be more precise and "in the moment". Sure reflexes might play a part, but they play a part in any game you play. That is even assuming that is what they do. Either way, DAO was not complex by any means, so to expect complexity in DA2 is rather...odd to me.

[AlanC9]

Lyssistr wrote...
 Well for many things there's no universal notion, including "good", "bad", "similar", "tasty", "ugly", yet people as of lately somehow manage to use them. Similarly is similarly, I really can't expand more on that.

Right. But if I think they're similar and you don't.... what?  The argument ends. Like I said, it's empty rhetoric; there's no way to get anywhere useful or interesting from there.