238 réponses à ce sujet

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Fortlowe wrote...

Tsuga C wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

...I lack the perspective I need to understand the gravity of these changes...

This is an important admission and is key to understanding why the Old Schoolers are highly P.O.'d over what we've read, seen, and directly experienced from the material released post-DA:O, DA2 previews included.

I also said that I appreciated DA:O in and of itself, and that it is that perspective that many of you 'old schoolers' are likely missing. Your judgment is clouded by a different game entirely. So much so that you're judging DA2 by a standard that doesn't even exist. Quoting me out of context is a symptom of that tainted view.

Where the outcry comes from is the fact that DA:O was highly marketed as a spiritial successor to Baldur's Gate, as some what of a "Hey all our fans who stuck with us, here, we made this new IP for you" And it lasted all of one game before they streamlined it down ala ME2 for the casual/console crowd. 

I think if you were in our shoes, you'd be pretty PO'ed too.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

FedericoV wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

The rogues needed a style of combat to distinguish them from warriors. It should be as much of a difference between them as warriors and mages.

Why?

Because many rogues players lamented that they just feel like warriors in light armour.

And if the distinction had to be made, why did it have look so silly?

The animation are not silly. You can have that feeling if you spam them over and over again during the exagerated part of the demo, but it does not seems so in the normal part.

And having said that,I suppose that the animation looks very flashy because the distinction between Rogues and Warriors is mostly artificial in a game like DA:O or DA2 so you need to exagerate the stylish differences to reach some kind of uniqueness.

The animations aren't only silly because they're flat out ridiculous looking but silly in the sense of who the hell does barrel rolls in combat? This isn't a John Woo movie last I checked, its a CRPG.

How different is a rogue and warrior supposed to look anyway? they're still both swinging swords or daggers to begin with.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Tsuga C wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Sure but maybe next time they won't go the extreme route and both bases can have an experience they want. What would be so wrong with that? Just rolling over and accepting it isn't going to help that cause.

Truth be told, I'm hardcore Old School and it's imposible to find a medium that'll please me (us, Sarah?) and the ME2 crowd.  In terms of what I want in a solid cRPG, BioWare hit its high-water mark with the Hordes of the Underdark expansion pack and the score or so of updates that went with the NWN1 series all the way up through 1.69.  DA:O was a welcome throwback that captured most but not all of what I wanted, but it lacked the user-friendly toolset that I routinely used to create customized gear and such for modules from the Vault.  It also failed to really live up the the Low Magic aspect of the setting that was spoken about in the early stages of its development.

The marketing of DA2 is proving to be as atrocious as was the later marketing of DA:O.  What I want is X for Generation Xers, not Y for the Gen Ys.  As was noted earlier in this thread, EAWare shows us something that's clearly Y and then trots out a developer to assure us Old Schoolers that what we read/saw is really X with a light gloss of Y to satisfy the action-gamer, console-type segment of the market whom their new masters at EA prize so highly.  Color me dissatisfied, EAWare.   You've stretched my credulity too far by half and I'm not alone in this assessment.

Let the ME series be what it is for the action/console segment of the market with a secondary port to PC and keep the DA series a traditional, hardcore cRPG for PCs with a secondary port to console.  Do not dilute the nature of the DA series to chase the shibboleth of the universally satisfying game.  Such a thing does not exist, nor can it.

/thread Tsuga

[ErichHartmann]

I'm so hardcore I want to revert back to 1980's PC gaming.

[Nefario]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

Tsuga C wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

...I lack the perspective I need to understand the gravity of these changes...

This is an important admission and is key to understanding why the Old Schoolers are highly P.O.'d over what we've read, seen, and directly experienced from the material released post-DA:O, DA2 previews included.

I also said that I appreciated DA:O in and of itself, and that it is that perspective that many of you 'old schoolers' are likely missing. Your judgment is clouded by a different game entirely. So much so that you're judging DA2 by a standard that doesn't even exist. Quoting me out of context is a symptom of that tainted view.

Where the outcry comes from is the fact that DA:O was highly marketed as a spiritial successor to Baldur's Gate, as some what of a "Hey all our fans who stuck with us, here, we made this new IP for you" And it lasted all of one game before they streamlined it down ala ME2 for the casual/console crowd. 

I think if you were in our shoes, you'd be pretty PO'ed too.

Your stance isn't unreasonable in itself, but I think you're making two assumptions without much to back them up:
That a game cannot be streamlined while retaining the "spirit" of the Baldur's Gate games; that said streamlining is occuring strictly for the benefit of console players.
The former seems a little pessimistic, but having doubts about something that matters to you is perfectly reasonable. The latter assumption, however, seems to be placing blame unfairly upon one particular group.

[Rixxencaxx]

Streamlining brings to fail.....

C&C got stramlined and failed

Red alert serie Failed

mass effect 2 sales where well below expectations....

But they streamline again.....

Only niche software houses bring big products nowadays....i think of eastern games like king's bounty the witcher men of war and so on....

[Derengard]

addiction21 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Sometimes
it feels like posting on these forums is like a message board port of
Whack-A-Mole. I don't wanna play anymore.

And it is a poorly ported streamlined version of Whack-A-Mole.

I've always been a fan of console slashers or third person shooters, I mean I hardly played one, but it's certainly a good sign that all developers agree that there needs to be no variety in game design/making money. Better?

Modifié par Derengard, 13 novembre 2010 - 06:14 .

[FedericoV]

Martanek wrote...
In other words, you basically claim that turning away from DA:O's RPG roots toward ME2's simplified RPG experience is a good thing?

RPG roots are one thing. Combat is another. I really don't see the connection here. In the old times hardchore and oldschool players cared about the story, about choices and consequences and not about minmaxing or powergaming...

And there are many versions of the action rpg genre. ME2 is not the only one. Having said that, I only think that it's better to be a good tactical game or a good action game than failing at both.

Secondly, I totally disagree with a second sentence of yours in the second paragraph. DA:O was supposed and  advertised to be a spiritual successor to the BG series. Considering DA:O a blend of sorts described above is purely your interpretation.

So, you believed to DA:O's marketing? Let's talk about the features in the game and you will see that the similarities betweeen DA:O and BG are mostly cosmetic. We can start when you want. Btw, even the marketing has never talked about DA:O as a BG II update. "Visceral combat" anyone?

I am firmly convinced that nobody at Bioware ever thought of DA:O being "a blend" or being an action game "plus something" in the first place. Again, this is a wishful thinking of some people on these forums.

Your convinctions are false, since Mr Gaider himself has stated that DA:O was allready a game with many action elements.

Finally, I do not think we need to see another mainstream-oriented, dumbed-down, ME2-based gameplay. Truly, it was enough once. It would be very unhealthy to serve such an insipid and lame RPG meal a second time.

So, you do not like ME2. Fine. I like it a lot and I do not think that is dumber on any level. But you should expand your horizon. It's not that ME2 has invented the action RPG genre. There has been many titles and different kind of action RPGs before ME2. I don't want a "Dragon Effect" if that's what you are implying. I want a good CRPG, being action or tactical. I can appreciate the strenghts and see the flwas of each genre.

[FedericoV]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

The animations aren't only silly because they're flat out ridiculous looking but silly in the sense of who the hell does barrel rolls in combat? This isn't a John Woo movie last I checked, its a CRPG.

In your opinion they are silly. In my opinion they are not, especially in a FANTASY GAME.

Moreover... so a CRPG cannot have flashy animations because... because... well, because you say so. Mind, I understand you not liking over the top visuals. But that has not anything to do with DA2 being a CRPG or not.

Following your logic, fans of Ultima V could say that BG II is not a CRPG...

How different is a rogue and warrior supposed to look anyway? they're still both swinging swords or daggers to begin with.

That's what I'm saying. But if they would merge those classes, I can imagine the uproar in the community and the "dumbed down for consolles" accusation...

Modifié par FedericoV, 13 novembre 2010 - 06:22 .

[FedericoV]

ErichHartmann wrote...

I'm so hardcore I want to revert back to 1980's PC gaming.

LOL. Is it Ultima 2?

[Fortlowe]

This 'streamlining' I keep hearing about has yet to rear its ugly head. Auto attack is still an option. Tactics are still fundemental to the gameplay. A voiced protagonist is an addition, not subtraction. Responsive combat is an addition as well.



There wasn't customizable armor in DA:O; not really. The Legion of the Dead armor looked the same on Allister as it did on Sten. Having an exclusively human protagonist was vital to the narrative, which will be even richer than that of DA:O (it will span ten years instead of only one) and I am certain that decision has meaning beyond DA2.



I mean, have you asked yourself if you really even liked DA:O? If so, then wouldn't it be grand if the franchise came into its own. I think so. I really loved Limbo. There is no denying that it is a spirtual successor to Mario Bros. Limbo was an animal of it's own though, and is best appreciated as such. The same can be said for any number of different games, from every genre. Was I P.O.'ed about the art direction that Zelda: The Wind Waker took from Zelda Ocarina of time? Initially, absolutely, even though a lot of people loved it. Then I played it, and realized that it was still Zelda, and brilliant in its own right. I was eventually even won over by the the art style. I'm confident DA2 will work out the same way if you allow it to be free of preconceptions.

[Tsuga C]

FedericoV wrote...
In your opinion they are silly. In my opinion they are not, especially in a FANTASY GAME.

Certain things flow well with and are in harmony with Dark Heroic Fantasy and the "dark 'n' gritty" milieu of Dragon Age.   Rogues bouncing around like a racqueteball or an actor in the Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon movie (bouncing on branches?  WTH?) is not one of them. 

[FedericoV]

Fortlowe wrote...

This 'streamlining' I keep hearing about has yet to rear its ugly head. Auto attack is still an option. Tactics are still fundemental to the gameplay. A voiced protagonist is an addition, not subtraction. Responsive combat is an addition as well.
 

Just to be fair and objective: we allready know the rule system has been streamlined in many ways. Imho, that was badly needed since DA:O's rule system was a complete mess and was artificially complex to the point of being broken in some areas. But unfortunately, that won't stop doomsayer to use the "dumbed down for consolle" mantra since they confuse complexity with depth...

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Fortlowe wrote...

This 'streamlining' I keep hearing about has yet to rear its ugly head. Auto attack is still an option. Tactics are still fundemental to the gameplay. A voiced protagonist is an addition, not subtraction. Responsive combat is an addition as well.

There wasn't customizable armor in DA:O; not really. The Legion of the Dead armor looked the same on Allister as it did on Sten. Having an exclusively human protagonist was vital to the narrative, which will be even richer than that of DA:O (it will span ten years instead of only one) and I am certain that decision has meaning beyond DA2.

I mean, have you asked yourself if you really even liked DA:O? If so, then wouldn't it be grand if the franchise came into its own. I think so. I really loved Limbo. There is no denying that it is a spirtual successor to Mario Bros. Limbo was an animal of it's own though, and is best appreciated as such. The same can be said for any number of different games, from every genre. Was I P.O.'ed about the art direction that Zelda: The Wind Waker took from Zelda Ocarina of time? Initially, absolutely, even though a lot of people loved it. Then I played it, and realized that it was still Zelda, and brilliant in its own right. I was eventually even won over by the the art style. I'm confident DA2 will work out the same way if you allow it to be free of preconceptions.

There's not customizable armor is DA2 either, unless you consider adding a rune or whatnot to be this great bastion of customization. Isabella is still going to be looking exactly the same for the entirety of the game, because hey, people never change their clothing, it would totally effect their personality! If I wanted to make Morrigan an Arcane Warrior and put her in Full plate, I could, now? lol no chance what so ever thanks to simplifying/streamlining companion armor choice down to zero. The game will span 10 years, your companions will wear the same outfit for that 10 years.

A voice protagonist isn't an improvement, oh yay I get to pick from some more paraphrased choices and guess at what "MY" PC will say. Yeah thats great. awesome.

There's a difference between making combat more responsive and having characters "warp across the screen to attack" Or flip and barrel roll and look moronic. The overhead tactical camera on PC is gone as well, or at the very least won't allow the player to zoom out as much. Granted you console guys didn't have a tactical camera so I'm sure you folks couldn't care less about that feature to begin with.

[Herr Uhl]

FedericoV wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

This 'streamlining' I keep hearing about has yet to rear its ugly head. Auto attack is still an option. Tactics are still fundemental to the gameplay. A voiced protagonist is an addition, not subtraction. Responsive combat is an addition as well.
 

Just to be fair and objective: we allready know the rule system has been streamlined in many ways. Imho, that was badly needed since DA:O's rule system was a complete mess and was artificially complex to the point of being broken in some areas. But unfortunately, that won't stop doomsayer to use the "dumbed down for consolle" mantra since they confuse complexity with depth...

Where? The no changing of companion armor and so on I see can be streamlining. But when was it ever stated that the rule system is any less complex?

[FedericoV]

Tsuga C wrote...

FedericoV wrote...
In your opinion they are silly. In my opinion they are not, especially in a FANTASY GAME.

Certain things flow well with and are in harmony with Dark Heroic Fantasy and the "dark 'n' gritty" milieu of Dragon Age.   Rogues bouncing around like a racqueteball or an actor in the Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon movie (bouncing on branches?  WTH?) is not one of them. 

I respect your view but I don't think so. I mean, if dev should start to cut everything that looks silly in a fantasy game like DA:O, I think that it would remain only the DVD (I mean, without content).

Don't want to start another "what dark fantasy mean" war. Just say, DA:O was allready an high fantasy game more than a dark fantasy game. Assuming that being dark do not mean being covered in blood from the beginning to the end of the game or chopping darkspawn heads.

And even if we assume that DA:O was really a dark fantasy game (wich I do not believe) you should remember the presence of the Heroic term just after the dark. In my opinion, is more Heroic to jump like a ninja than shuffling in to position like an old man in his 80's...

Modifié par FedericoV, 13 novembre 2010 - 06:46 .

[FedericoV]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Where? The no changing of companion armor and so on I see can be streamlining. But when was it ever stated that the rule system is any less complex?

Because they have cut most if not all of the derived stats (like armour penetration, spell power and even fatigue if I remember well), throw away the stupid tier system for armours and weapons and reorganized each skill tree in a simpler way. And I thank God for those choices.

PS: Imho the no changing of companions armour is not streamlining if the upgrade/rune system is deep and rewarding (even if simpler to approach).

Modifié par FedericoV, 13 novembre 2010 - 06:52 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

FedericoV wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Where? The no changing of companion armor and so on I see can be streamlining. But when was it ever stated that the rule system is any less complex?

Because they have cut most if not all of the derived stats (like armour penetration, spell power and even fatigue if I remember well), throw away the stupid tier system for armours and weapons and reorganized each skill tree in a simpler way. And I thank God for those choices.

Well yeah, they stripped so much armor customization out of the game, why not strip out fatigue and armor penetration and everything else while they're at it. Wouldn't want that stuff in there, might be too confusing for the target audience.

[Herr Uhl]

FedericoV wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Where? The no changing of companion armor and so on I see can be streamlining. But when was it ever stated that the rule system is any less complex?

Because they have cut most if not all of the derived stats (like armour penetration, spell power and even fatigue if I remember well), throw away the stupid tier system for armours and weapons and reorganized each skill tree in a simpler way. And I thank God for those choices.

Were the skill-trees hard-arranged? I see no way in which it could have been much simpler, they weren't even trees, they were separate lines. The tier system being gone would make it harder to determine how good an armor is at a cursory glance if anything.

But the derived stats thing, could you point me where you picked that up, please?

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Well yeah, they stripped so much armor customization out of the game, why not strip out fatigue and armor penetration and everything else while they're at it. Wouldn't want that stuff in there, might be too confusing for the target audience. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wondering.png[/smilie]

And you wonder why people see you as overly confrontational.

[Nerevar-as]

Tsuga C wrote...

FedericoV wrote...
In your opinion they are silly. In my opinion they are not, especially in a FANTASY GAME.

Certain things flow well with and are in harmony with Dark Heroic Fantasy and the "dark 'n' gritty" milieu of Dragon Age.   Rogues bouncing around like a racqueteball or an actor in the Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon movie (bouncing on branches?  WTH?) is not one of them. 

Rogues were a lost battle from the beginning. I mean, Stealth was the ninja dissapearing into smoke thing, and Awakening took things even farther. The bouncing around depends on how it is done, but it seems a movement the character would make more to look badass rather than out of necessity most times.

[Deviija]

Tsuga C wrote...
Let the ME series be what it is for the action/console segment of the market with a secondary port to PC and keep the DA series a traditional, hardcore cRPG for PCs with a secondary port to console.  Do not dilute the nature of the DA series to chase the shibboleth of the universally satisfying game.  Such a thing does not exist, nor can it.

I agree.  DAO sold so well on its own merit and system and gained critical success that I really fail to see the reason, need, and desire to change everything inherit within the system.  The only resounding comlaint about DAO I have heard through review sites was related to the graphics, not the system or the combat mechanics or armor tiers or skill diversity.  Refining what you have rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater would have been a better approach, IMO.  And then tweaking the art and graphics.  

[Tsuga C]

FedericoV wrote...
...I respect your view but I...

...prefer silly and insipid as long as it looks |33t and kewl.  Got it.  You want your medieval fantasy games heavy on the fantasy and light on the medieval and I have always preferred the exact opposite.

Just because characters were slow to react and the rogues were felt by some to need a bit more pizzazz in combat doesn't mean that EAWare needed to swing the pendulum radically to the other end of the spectrum.

Modifié par Tsuga C, 13 novembre 2010 - 07:01 .

[Brockololly]

Herr Uhl wrote...
Were the skill-trees hard-arranged? I see no way in which it could have been much simpler, they weren't even trees, they were separate lines. The tier system being gone would make it harder to determine how good an armor is at a cursory glance if anything.

But the derived stats thing, could you point me where you picked that up, please?

Much of that talk is in the thread Peter Thomas had going a couple months ago, where ever thats buried in this forum.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Herr Uhl wrote...

FedericoV wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Where? The no changing of companion armor and so on I see can be streamlining. But when was it ever stated that the rule system is any less complex?

Because they have cut most if not all of the derived stats (like armour penetration, spell power and even fatigue if I remember well), throw away the stupid tier system for armours and weapons and reorganized each skill tree in a simpler way. And I thank God for those choices.

Were the skill-trees hard-arranged? I see no way in which it could have been much simpler, they weren't even trees, they were separate lines. The tier system being gone would make it harder to determine how good an armor is at a cursory glance if anything.

But the derived stats thing, could you point me where you picked that up, please?

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Well yeah, they stripped so much armor customization out of the game, why not strip out fatigue and armor penetration and everything else while they're at it. Wouldn't want that stuff in there, might be too confusing for the target audience. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wondering.png[/smilie]

And you wonder why people see you as overly confrontational.

No not really, I just call em like I see em, and it pisses console users off to even consider that games on their perfered platform tend to actually end up being better on the PC. Consoles are a rip-off.  A lot of people who use them say, well I can't afford to upgrade my PC and yet they've spent 200 to 500 on a console and are paying 5 to 15 more on each game they buy.

Modifié par CoS Sarah Jinstar, 13 novembre 2010 - 07:00 .

[FedericoV]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Well yeah, they stripped so much armor customization out of the game, why not strip out fatigue and armor penetration and everything else while they're at it. Wouldn't want that stuff in there, might be too confusing for the target audience.

No, the point is that a feature is not good if artificially complex and convolute. A feature is good because of the level of challenge it adds to the game. Simpler do not mean dumber on any level. A simple game could be more difficult and deep than a "complex" one.

For example, Fatigue in DA:O was silly. It was impossible to balance in a enjoyable and rewarding way so the result was "give a tons of potions to the players".  So many potions that you never runned short of Mana or Stamina (after Awakening).

AP? It was even sillier. You could ignore it from the beginning to the end of the game because its result overlapped with pure damage so it has not any use.