179 réponses à ce sujet

[Kat313]

Hi, sorry to barge in on what looks like some funny banter but I wanted to put in my minimal 2 cents. I love ME1, and it does make that nostalgic part of me a bit down when I realize that ME2 is the popular, golden-in-the-sun child of the new Bioware era. Don't get me wrong, I loved ME2, its fun and intriguing but it just doesn't offer that amazing "lose yourself in this story" quality. I mean things like learning of these doomed and mystic protheians, fearing the destroyer reapers, connecting to the main and supporting characters, and all the little bits that added up to this all inclusive great experience. Anyway, thanks for having this thread so I could write all that and blow some steam in an appropriate setting

[Addai]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
Heh, I was thinking the same thing.  The same sort of thing I think when people tell me that fat in steak is bad.  Namely, get the frack away from my plate.

It's actually a better metaphor than folks were thinking.  Steak with the fat marbled in so you get a taste of its flavor in every bite?  That's awesome.  Everyone likes that.

Fat in a big lump on the side that is chewy gristle? That's the stuff that gets trimmed.

I understand, but people telling you that the things you like are outdated and booooring are as annoying as the people who come around with their magnifying glasses measuring the fat globules on your plate.

[upsettingshorts]

Addai67 wrote...
I understand, but people telling you that the things you like are outdated and booooring are as annoying as the people who come around with their magnifying glasses measuring the fat globules on your plate.

Sure.

I'd say the best way to end the food analogy is to say that one person's side dish is another person's filler.

[AlanC9]

etherhonky wrote...
also as a side not when i use the term hardcore, i dont mean to adpot the meaning that is tossed around mainstream media as of late. i just mean its a game that services RPG fans over any other genre, thast all i meant.

so, i just re-installed ME1 today. to see if i was forgetting something, maybe i was wrong about ME2 and ME2 is just a much better game. i really don't agree with that statement though.

ME1 has something that ME2 is missing and that is the rewarding loot. now i know that many players would prefer better shooting mechanics over loot any day. but i loved all the different armor, weapons and mods in ME1. i liekd that it was like a 9 "star" system that had a tinge of diablo "loot whoring" going on. a very fin randomness that was VERY rewarding to me.

Well, that's exactly the issue. I didn't miss that stuff in ME2. The things that Diablo did are things that I tolerate in RPGs, not things that I like about them.

Maybe that makes me less of an RPG fan? I dunno. If so, so be it.

so my last point in this long whine fest, what are we worth? those of us who have been around since Baldur's Gate... waiting on the forums for a game called Neverwinter Nights. those of us who, i shall now evoke a bit of an ego, those of us who helped build bioware by buying the "hardcore" RPGs of the past. (hardcore RPG- a game that features more RPG elements than any other element). the ones who bought Jade Empire, SW: KotOR and, hell its been a few years, Mass Effect... are we now the minority of the bioware fans? and this doesnt mean i assume i'm the "correct" fan, or that my opinion has more value. 

only that where and how did bioware start making games that werent for Baldur's children?

What do you mean "we," kemosabe?

 Being around since BG doesn't mean that you like loot. If it did, I'd like it. 

"Baldur's children" is a cute bit of rhetoric, but it just doesn't do the work you want it to.

Edit: so I guess what I'm saying is that the old fans were probably not as uniform, not as much like you, as you thought they were. Now, if you want to say that a certain faction of us old-timers are being rejected by Bioware, that seems reasonable.

Modifié par AlanC9, 11 novembre 2010 - 08:15 .

[Vaeliorin]

I've order a steak rare once. I will never do so again. It was cold. I don't like cold meat. I generally go for medium-rare, though I'm okay with medium. Not that I'm a huge fan of steak (which is strange, as I'm pretty darn close to being carnivorous.)



Regardless, I'm personally not at the point where I think that DA2 will be a bad game. I'm willing to bet that it will be a pretty decent game. It simply won't be a game that I will enjoy as much as I would an old-school RPG.

[AlanC9]

The problem with rare steak is that it'll end up cooling off unless you're running an efficient operation. I find it's even worse with roast beef, since you've got to carve that before serving. OTOH, there's always hot gravy to mitigate that problem.

Modifié par AlanC9, 11 novembre 2010 - 08:49 .

[EDfromRED]

 I agree with sentiments of this topics author. I'm appaled at the thought that Bioware will throw out the RPG-Baby out with the bathwater with Dragon Age 2. Mass Effect 2 was a good game, but it was RPG-Lite. No loot, limited exploration, it was wayyyy too much on the rails.
  I loved the tough and tactical tone of Dragon Age: Origins, the enviroment  & character art-style was a tad ugly, but in every other respect it was the meaty type of RPG I adore. I hope Dragon Age 2 does not turn into a prettier but watered down version of  DA:O
 Oh well, if Bioware screws the pooch with Dragon Age 2, The Witcher 2 looks like a Mature RPG that'll pull no punches.

[The Masked Rog]

EDfromRED wrote...

 I agree with sentiments of this topics author. I'm appaled at the thought that Bioware will throw out the RPG-Baby out with the bathwater with Dragon Age 2. Mass Effect 2 was a good game, but it was RPG-Lite. No loot, limited exploration, it was wayyyy too much on the rails.
  I loved the tough and tactical tone of Dragon Age: Origins, the enviroment  & character art-style was a tad ugly, but in every other respect it was the meaty type of RPG I adore. I hope Dragon Age 2 does not turn into a prettier but watered down version of  DA:O
 Oh well, if Bioware screws the pooch with Dragon Age 2, The Witcher 2 looks like a Mature RPG that'll pull no punches.

The Witcher 2 will be a horrible action and twitch based abomination just like the first was. I mean, timing in my combat? NO way? I much prefer the hardcore way Dragon Age 2 is taking it, with pause and using abilities and having stat based and absolutely not dependent on player skill.

I kid. TW2 will probably be a great game. Though I can't see how people call that hardcore and Dragon Age 2 streamlined.

[Archereon]

EDfromRED wrote...

 I agree with sentiments of this topics author. I'm appaled at the thought that Bioware will throw out the RPG-Baby out with the bathwater with Dragon Age 2. Mass Effect 2 was a good game, but it was RPG-Lite. No loot, limited exploration, it was wayyyy too much on the rails.
  I loved the tough and tactical tone of Dragon Age: Origins, the enviroment  & character art-style was a tad ugly, but in every other respect it was the meaty type of RPG I adore. I hope Dragon Age 2 does not turn into a prettier but watered down version of  DA:O
 Oh well, if Bioware screws the pooch with Dragon Age 2, The Witcher 2 looks like a Mature RPG that'll pull no punches.

Honestly, the witcher doesn't look like its gonna be all that great to me.  But if what your saying is right, or if DA2 somehow tanks financially, it'll be final proof that classic Western RPGs are dead, once and for all.

And IMHO, ME2 wasn't RPG-lite, it actually crossed the line into being an extremely repetitive TPS with RPG elements.

[Nozybidaj]

Threads like this simply highlight the widely varying opinions of the market today for me. Some folks are looking for games with lots of choice, deep mechanics, skill and inventory management requirements, etc., etc. And there are still games and developers out there making games like that.



Some folks are going to prefer BW games where you are basically playing an interactive movie where you can hop right in, get a little action, decide if you want to use the nice guy or jerk response, then get right back in to the action. I really think this divide is what creates most of the angst and heated words on this forum as those two views are not easily reconcilable, and I don't really see BW even wanting to try to, nor should they.



I'd suggest that if you find yourself unhappy with certain decisions being made, that branching out and trying some other games would probably rectify most of the issues.

[errant_knight]

Nozybidaj wrote...

Threads like this simply highlight the widely varying opinions of the market today for me. Some folks are looking for games with lots of choice, deep mechanics, skill and inventory management requirements, etc., etc. And there are still games and developers out there making games like that.

Some folks are going to prefer BW games where you are basically playing an interactive movie where you can hop right in, get a little action, decide if you want to use the nice guy or jerk response, then get right back in to the action. I really think this divide is what creates most of the angst and heated words on this forum as those two views are not easily reconcilable, and I don't really see BW even wanting to try to, nor should they.

I'd suggest that if you find yourself unhappy with certain decisions being made, that branching out and trying some other games would probably rectify most of the issues.

This would be true if the comparison wasn't to another Bioware game, but to another game entirely. DA:O felt very much like you were in a good book or movie, but had the elements that the OP (and many others) find valuable. In order for the issue to be rectified by trying new games, a person would actually have to like the style of those games, which is pretty much the opposite of the point of the post.

[errant_knight]

Archereon wrote...

EDfromRED wrote...

 I agree with sentiments of this topics author. I'm appaled at the thought that Bioware will throw out the RPG-Baby out with the bathwater with Dragon Age 2. Mass Effect 2 was a good game, but it was RPG-Lite. No loot, limited exploration, it was wayyyy too much on the rails.
  I loved the tough and tactical tone of Dragon Age: Origins, the enviroment  & character art-style was a tad ugly, but in every other respect it was the meaty type of RPG I adore. I hope Dragon Age 2 does not turn into a prettier but watered down version of  DA:O
 Oh well, if Bioware screws the pooch with Dragon Age 2, The Witcher 2 looks like a Mature RPG that'll pull no punches.

Honestly, the witcher doesn't look like its gonna be all that great to me.  But if what your saying is right, or if DA2 somehow tanks financially, it'll be final proof that classic Western RPGs are dead, once and for all.

And IMHO, ME2 wasn't RPG-lite, it actually crossed the line into being an extremely repetitive TPS with RPG elements.

No, because DA:O did extremely well, proof that a fairly traditional wrpg can be very popular, both critically and in terms of numbers playing it. The fact that they want to make a different kind of game for DA2 doesn't negate that. Not that I think DA2 will tank. Likely, it will bring in people who didn't care for DA:O, or who are attracted by the new combat style in roughly the same numbers who are lost due to the changes, or who don't like what they see.. Possibly more.

[Nozybidaj]

errant_knight wrote...

This would be true if the comparison wasn't to another Bioware game, but to another game entirely. DA:O felt very much like you were in a good book or movie, but had the elements that the OP (and many others) find valuable. In order for the issue to be rectified by trying new games, a person would actually have to like the style of those games, which is pretty much the opposite of the point of the post.

Well I kinda left that point out.  I don't really expect that BW is going to be making games like that (DAO) anymore.  DAO was really the last game they made without an overbearing EA influence since it was already well into development before they were gobbled up (at least I seem to recall so, don't remember exactly when EA purchased them).  With the shorter turn around times EA will be expecting I anticipate the ME2 "streamlined" version of gameplay will be the new BW staple.

Cutting of inventory, cutting of meaningful skill adavancement, things of this nature are probably what BW felt they could remove from the development cycle and still make the core parts of the game they feel are important in the time frames they are given.  This isn't to say I felt DAO or ME1 were greatly complex or deep games in terms of skill advancement and gameplay mechancis, they weren't.  They certainly were though in comparison to ME2 which is virtually devoid of those things.

I'm sure at some point BW simply had to make a list of priorities for their game development.  What's most important?  (incoming obviously simplified example) 1) Story 2) Characters 3) Fun combat etc, etc, etc.  Then say "Okay everything below this line *draws line at some arbitrary point on the list* is cut to meet the deadline".

My point is different developers make games with different focuses and part of the angst seen in the communities comes from not understanding what the developers are trying to make.  BW makes a DA2 game focused first on story telling and characters where as Blizzard makes a Diablo game focused first on dungeoun crawling and itemization while Bethesda makes a TES game focused on character development and role playing.  They all have elements that bleed across but where one developer focuses on a particular feature they will be weaker in others where another developer will be stronger in that same area.

I think it is okay for fans to voice concern over things they feel are lacking so long as they keep in mind that what they are looking for may just not be a particular strong point or focus for that developer and should look elsewhere for that type of gameplay.

Does lack of customization options for my character and companions concern me for a BW game?  A little, but I understand that their focus is placed largely on the story and my only real complaints come when they fall short on that (I'm looking at you ME2).  Would I like to see stronger story lines and better pc/npc interactions in the next TES game?  Sure would, but I know as long as I get to create my own character and role play out my own adventures as I see fit whenever TES V finally comes I know I'll be happy.

Hmm, think I made my point without being too confusing.

[Addai]

Vaeliorin wrote...

Regardless, I'm personally not at the point where I think that DA2 will be a bad game. I'm willing to bet that it will be a pretty decent game. It simply won't be a game that I will enjoy as much as I would an old-school RPG.

Same here.  I don't doubt at all that it will be a great game, and I'm sure the writers will come through as well.  It just sounds like it won't be as much fun to play.  I still hope it does well for the sake of the franchise.  I would like to continue to hear more about Thedas.

[Da_Lion_Man]

I AGREE!!!!! Dragon Age 2 looks ****ty!

[AlanC9]

errant_knight wrote...

No, because DA:O did extremely well, proof that a fairly traditional wrpg can be very popular, both critically and in terms of numbers playing it. The fact that they want to make a different kind of game for DA2 doesn't negate that. Not that I think DA2 will tank. Likely, it will bring in people who didn't care for DA:O, or who are attracted by the new combat style in roughly the same numbers who are lost due to the changes, or who don't like what they see.. Possibly more.

Someone upthread, or maybe in another thread, proposed that a lot of people bought DAO and didn't like it. I don't think this is a tenable proposition for DAO any more than I think it's tenable for ME2 -- user reviews simply don't show this. But it's not inconceivable.

[AlanC9]

Nozybidaj wrote...
Well I kinda left that point out.  I don't really expect that BW is going to be making games like that (DAO) anymore.  DAO was really the last game they made without an overbearing EA influence since it was already well into development before they were gobbled up (at least I seem to recall so, don't remember exactly when EA purchased them).  With the shorter turn around times EA will be expecting I anticipate the ME2 "streamlined" version of gameplay will be the new BW staple.

Cutting of inventory, cutting of meaningful skill adavancement, things of this nature are probably what BW felt they could remove from the development cycle and still make the core parts of the game they feel are important in the time frames they are given.  This isn't to say I felt DAO or ME1 were greatly complex or deep games in terms of skill advancement and gameplay mechancis, they weren't.  They certainly were though in comparison to ME2 which is virtually devoid of those things.

I'm sure at some point BW simply had to make a list of priorities for their game development.  What's most important?  (incoming obviously simplified example) 1) Story 2) Characters 3) Fun combat etc, etc, etc.  Then say "Okay everything below this line *draws line at some arbitrary point on the list* is cut to meet the deadline".

About the only place I'd disagree with this is that I don't see how EA has anything to do with that. Not being a part of EA wouldn't magically make Bio able to stop prioritizing stuff.

[Nozybidaj]

AlanC9 wrote...
About the only place I'd disagree with this is that I don't see how EA has anything to do with that. Not being a part of EA wouldn't magically make Bio able to stop prioritizing stuff.

<_<  It's all about time.  If you are on a 18 month release instead of being able to push it out to 24 or even 30 month release schedules you are obviously not going to be able to include as much.

[YuniSticksitDeep]

The reality is THIS.  DA:O was first and Formost a PC game, in the Baldur's Gate mindset.

The new EA/Bioware game is a console game formost and a slightly  modified Port to the pc second.

To  Quote  David Gaider   "The  PC portion of our Customer base is small and the Console portion much  larger" and by abstraction...much more important to satisfy.

We are the red haired (male) step-children of EA and now Bioware...to deny this is to be  delusional.

To Paraphase  Carl Sagan:  "It is better to embrace the truth however harsh, than to live in delusion however familar and comforting it is."

PS I remember Madden Football and Tiger Woods Golf   "Started"  out on the PC...where are they now??????  

ONLY on the consoles.

Yuni<3

[Brockololly]

YuniSticksitDeep wrote...
To Paraphase  Carl Sagan:  "It is better to embrace the truth however harsh, than to live in delusion however familar and comforting it is."

Carl Sagan is the man. That is all.

Modifié par Brockololly, 11 novembre 2010 - 07:08 .

[Lyssistr]

YuniSticksitDeep wrote...

The reality is THIS.  DA:O was first and Formost a PC game, in the Baldur's Gate mindset.

The new EA/Bioware game is a console game formost and a slightly  modified Port to the pc second.

To  Quote  David Gaider   "The  PC portion of our Customer base is small and the Console portion much  larger" and by abstraction...much more important to satisfy.

We are the red haired (male) step-children of EA and now Bioware...to deny this is to be  delusional.

To Paraphase  Carl Sagan:  "It is better to embrace the truth however harsh, than to live in delusion however familar and comforting it is."

PS I remember Madden Football and Tiger Woods Golf   "Started"  out on the PC...where are they now??????  

ONLY on the consoles.

Yuni<3

well said, could also link other dev statements but I see no reason to. You're spot on and tbh I wouldn't mind this happening to any other franchise (e.g. ME2/3) but considering DA's franchise was about "old-school" & "returning to their roots", I just can't see how consolizing it is a good thing.

[AlanC9]

Nozybidaj wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
About the only place I'd disagree with this is that I don't see how EA has anything to do with that. Not being a part of EA wouldn't magically make Bio able to stop prioritizing stuff.

<_<  It's all about time.  If you are on a 18 month release instead of being able to push it out to 24 or even 30 month release schedules you are obviously not going to be able to include as much.

But time = money. Go to a 30 month schedule and you have to sell more games to pay all that additional salary. I think Gaider dropped hints that DAO came close to breaking the company, and may not have been very profitable even though it sold well -- might have lost money if not for DLCs, even.

This calculation doesn't change no matter who is running the company.

[Nozybidaj]

AlanC9 wrote...
.. snip...

24 months, 30 months, whatever, you want to argue the semantics of a made up example, fine have it, I'm not going to indulge you past this though.  That said, I believe DAO was in development for quite a bit longer than that, 5 years or so wasn't it?  That's using an awfully extreme example if you ask me, but fine.  I still find it rather hard to believe BW was on the verge of breaking at that point, it very well may be the case, but I'd need a better source than "I think a writer said so somewhere at some point in time".

The important thing, EA is certainly going to hold them to much tighter release schedules than they would have been able to afford otherwise.  18 months is not a very long time when you are conducting large scale projects like this.  An extra 3 - 6 months could do wonders for both content and polish, but if the over-under on polish isn't favorable for EA even if it would have been favorable for the game they'll never get the chance.

[AlanC9]

Hey, make up any numbers you please as long as you're acknowledging that longer dev cycles = more money spent by the developer.



If the over-under on polish isn't favorable to EA, then it wouldn't be favorable to an independent Bioware either. I suppose you can argue that an independent Bioware would be willing to accept smaller profit margins, though. Are you actually arguing that? If so, on what evidence?

[errant_knight]

Nozybidaj wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

This would be true if the comparison wasn't to another Bioware game, but to another game entirely. DA:O felt very much like you were in a good book or movie, but had the elements that the OP (and many others) find valuable. In order for the issue to be rectified by trying new games, a person would actually have to like the style of those games, which is pretty much the opposite of the point of the post.

Well I kinda left that point out.  I don't really expect that BW is going to be making games like that (DAO) anymore.  DAO was really the last game they made without an overbearing EA influence since it was already well into development before they were gobbled up (at least I seem to recall so, don't remember exactly when EA purchased them).  With the shorter turn around times EA will be expecting I anticipate the ME2 "streamlined" version of gameplay will be the new BW staple.

Cutting of inventory, cutting of meaningful skill adavancement, things of this nature are probably what BW felt they could remove from the development cycle and still make the core parts of the game they feel are important in the time frames they are given.  This isn't to say I felt DAO or ME1 were greatly complex or deep games in terms of skill advancement and gameplay mechancis, they weren't.  They certainly were though in comparison to ME2 which is virtually devoid of those things.

I'm sure at some point BW simply had to make a list of priorities for their game development.  What's most important?  (incoming obviously simplified example) 1) Story 2) Characters 3) Fun combat etc, etc, etc.  Then say "Okay everything below this line *draws line at some arbitrary point on the list* is cut to meet the deadline".

My point is different developers make games with different focuses and part of the angst seen in the communities comes from not understanding what the developers are trying to make.  BW makes a DA2 game focused first on story telling and characters where as Blizzard makes a Diablo game focused first on dungeoun crawling and itemization while Bethesda makes a TES game focused on character development and role playing.  They all have elements that bleed across but where one developer focuses on a particular feature they will be weaker in others where another developer will be stronger in that same area.

I think it is okay for fans to voice concern over things they feel are lacking so long as they keep in mind that what they are looking for may just not be a particular strong point or focus for that developer and should look elsewhere for that type of gameplay.

Does lack of customization options for my character and companions concern me for a BW game?  A little, but I understand that their focus is placed largely on the story and my only real complaints come when they fall short on that (I'm looking at you ME2).  Would I like to see stronger story lines and better pc/npc interactions in the next TES game?  Sure would, but I know as long as I get to create my own character and role play out my own adventures as I see fit whenever TES V finally comes I know I'll be happy.

Hmm, think I made my point without being too confusing.

It makes me sad to do so, but I have to say that I think you're probably correct. More sanguine about it than I am, but correct.

Modifié par errant_knight, 11 novembre 2010 - 11:58 .