934 réponses à ce sujet

[mokponobi]

Some of what you said is confirmed, however no one has said as far as i know that



the 3 slots you lose are made up by better buffs through the other items



or that



their one armor contains even MORE buffs

[soteria]

You know, you could have just typed all that as a single, coherent sentence on one line. It would be much easier to read. I'm not trying to be mean, but in English you don't normally start a new line in the middle of a sentence, unless you're writing poetry or something.

[crimzontearz]

mokponobi wrote...

Some of what you said is confirmed, however no one has said as far as i know that

the 3 slots you lose are made up by better buffs through the other items

or that

their one armor contains even MORE buffs

ok....as for the first, it was "implied" by Laidlaw saying that now the buffing is reserved solely to the  accessories and by his description of items and their efficiency

the one armor slots contains more buffs meaning the item itself IS buffed (like grants bonuses and stuff) and sucessive iterations of it are more effective than the previous one (with more/better buffs) mike actually said this himself in not so many words

[JamieCOTC]

"I haven't changed my underwear in ten years. I dare you to come closer."

[In Exile]

Drasanil wrote...
How? It's a PVE game not a PVP one, I must of failed to notice Zev was gimped given he almost never dropped dead. The need to use cookie cutter builds says more about your ability, or rather lack there of, than anything else.

It has nothing to do with PvP or PvE. I don't play MMOs, so I don't consider it in those terms.

Rather, it's the case that DA:O has only a few actual functional combat roles. What non-optimal builds mean is just a character being used in one of these functional roles in a highly inefficient ways. The majority of this development comes from stat distribution not armour.

To have Zevran in Warden Commander armour, for example, you want to give him a minimum of 24 strength. This means (for example) either wasting points for dex for an archer build, or going for a dual wield STR build which is much weaker in DPS and loses backstab bonuses fron CUN or defence bonuses from DEX.

It has nothing to do with cookie cutter builds or a lack of imagination. To get an equialent to Zevran in heavy armour, numerically, all you need is to distribute points to STR or some other dump stat (from a powergame standpoint) and then subotimally pump the rune slots with armour+ runes instead of anything else.

That will give you the same build.

Qset wrote...

Ok, now show me where I mentioned armour in
my post above. Points 1 to 3 cover all inventory slots and not just
armor.

Inventory slots are identical across the games,
unless Bioware has has changed these features.

What we cannot
change is armour, and armour influenced was by statistical distribution, like I said above.

My question is
- can I perform the equivalent level
of stat customisation via companion inventory that I could in DAO. By
stat customisation here I don't mean just str and dex etc, I mean apply
the same level of statisical distribution/customisation that I could in
DAO.

I wouldn't see why not. We have the same stats, and we have been given no reason to believe we cannot freely distribute stat points at level up.

Now, like I said above, there are few actual combat roles. But lots of suboptimal roles for those builds. And I'm sure DA:O will allow you to make mistakes building a character.

-
Is my first question even relevant under the DA2 mechanics, will I
either be unable to match DAO levels of customisation because a. game
mechanics no longer require it or b. game mechanics prevent it due to
class separations or c. any other reason the Bioware team define.

Here is the thing: most DA:O customization was just statistical distribution. We know inventory items do not usually have class restrictions and we can level up stats. That's really all you could customize in DA:O, so I can't see the difference.

This I just found patronising

I apologize, but I look harshly on DA:O as a "customizable" game. We are allowed very little practical freedom in combat because the rules we have are very fixed. We can just build lots of different bad characters at them.

[In Exile]

MerinTB wrote...

There's a reason I played PS:T zero times through, BG2 1 time through, and IWD over a dozen times through.  And it's iterated (perhaps neither clearly nor succinctly, my apologies) above.

One thing to consider is that Bioware was never in the business of making quite what you thought was an RPG. You can see that even in the games from BG to BG II. The features that were added looked to expand the rails on the story, the depth of the fixed NPCs, the ties of the main PC (since you could IWD the party) to the story, etc.

KoTOR pushed that even further, and so did JE. Bioware just seems to have never found these features of an RPG central. It's why I follow their products in the first place. For me, IWD was a dead game.

[AlanC9]

Since nobody else corrected this, I guess it falls to me.

MerinTB wrote...
 BioWare's moved out of niche and into mainstream, and cRPGs are niche.  They'll never move 5 million, let alone 10 million, classic RPG games.

Bio never was a niche developer in the first place. Their objective has always been to make games that are big sellers, and they have generally succeeded.

Of course, you can say that the "classic RPG game" -- I can understand that definition without necessarily endorsing it --- is no longer mainstream, and therefore Bioware has abandoned making such games. But Bio's the same as it has always been; it's the gamers who have changed.

Edit: and I'm with In Exile's point in the preceding post. Market realities and business philosophy aside, there's no evidence that Bio collectively ever even liked some of the hallmarks of the "classic RPG game."

Modifié par AlanC9, 01 décembre 2010 - 04:33 .

[ErichHartmann]

BG I and II both sold over 2 million copies. Nothing niche or under performing about those sales figures.

Modifié par ErichHartmann, 01 décembre 2010 - 04:49 .

[MerinTB]

[quote]AlanC9 wrote...
Since nobody else corrected this, I guess it falls to me.
[quote]MerinTB wrote...
 BioWare's moved out of niche and into mainstream, and cRPGs are niche.  They'll never move 5 million, let alone 10 million, classic RPG games.[/quote]
Bio never was a niche developer in the first place. Their objective has always been to make games that are big sellers, and they have generally succeeded.
[/quote]
You're misinterpreting me.
cRPGs are (EDIT - even more) niche NOW, and have been probably since 2002 or so.  Not action RPGs, not shooter RPGs... games like Baldur's Gate or Pools of Darkness or Ultima 7.  (EDIT - and they were never one of the top selling genres for computer games - now JRPGs on consoles, that's a different ball of wax)
BioWare moved OUT of the niche and into the mainstream - by that I mean they were making (ignoring Shattered Steel and MDK2 for the moment) cRPGs but when the console market grew they started working on console RPGs with more and more of an actiony bent to them.  They are following what they perceive as the market and slowly adapting most of their playerbase with them (my interpretation of events.)

You aren't correcting me - you misread what I wrote and made a couple assumptions.  In the end, you are agreeing with my intent if not with how you read my words.

[quote]Of course, you can say that the "classic RPG game" -- I can understand that definition without necessarily endorsing it --- is no longer mainstream, and therefore Bioware has abandoned making such games. But Bio's the same as it has always been; it's the gamers who have changed.[/quote]

BioWare's not the same as it's always been - like any company, they add people and people leave.  Their fanbase hasn't changed - they are just trying to add a different market segment to their fanbase.

[quote]Edit: and I'm with In Exile's point in the preceding post. Market realities and business philosophy aside, there's no evidence that Bio collectively ever even liked some of the hallmarks of the "classic RPG game."[/quote]

Dr. Greg Zeschuk has been quoted as saying that Wasteland is his favorite game.  Wasteland is absolutely a classic RPG, and one of my favorite games ever as well.

Dr. Ray Muzyka said his favorite game was System Shock - so it's no surprise where all the story / adventure gaming aspects of BioWare games come from.

I'd say a found listing a seminole classic RPG as his favorite game shows that he must have liked most of those classic RPG "hallmarks" as you call them.


[/quote]

Modifié par MerinTB, 01 décembre 2010 - 05:31 .

[addiction21]

A waffle based rpg now that is a nich market... and thats all I have to say.

[MerinTB]

ErichHartmann wrote...
BG I and II both sold over 2 million copies. Nothing niche or under performing about those sales figures.

RPGs were not as small a niche in 2000.  FPS hadn't completely climbed to the top of the heap yet.  Halo came out in 2001, and I would argue it was around 2001-2002 that FPS became the dominant game genre, building on what Doom started and Half-Life successfully exploded.  It was also the XBOX joining the PS2 and the Gamecube, making it a three-way market again BUT the American console focusing on the FPS genre strongly, that created the biggest boom in console gaming (where, yes, most of that market was PS2 at the time but XBOX grew the market a lot.)

BG 1 and 2 were created when cRPGs were, more or less, closest to  king they'd ever be.  Diablo had real legs (action RPG or no), Final Fantasy 7 hit the world like an asteroid, Fallout was a huge success (really, 1997 was near the peak for cRPGs...)  but discounting JPRGs, cRPGs were at best like the fifth best selling genre at their height.

BG 1 and 2 combined sold over 5 million copies (to date), and that was a nice feat in the day - but it could be called more niche when compared to sales of games that came out before BG2:
The Sims - best selling PC game for a long time, currently at 13 million copies
Myst - previous best selling PC game, came out in 1993, 6 million.
Half-life - something like 9 million copies
Starcraft - 11 million

They was on track with Diablo (2.5 million by 2001) and Diablo 2, more or less (4 million) but behind all contemporary Final Fantasy's - FFVII (over 9 million) through  FFX (6.6 million).

BG's numbers would good, and they are "better in 1997-2000" than Mass Effect or Dragon Age's numbers are in the late 2000's early 2010's, but when compared to "top-sellers" of the time, they were down in the niche. 

Adventure games outsold cRPGs, FPS not near the height of their popularity outsold cRPGs, RTS outsold cRPGs.  When you have a dying genre, a birthing genre and a stable genre all outselling genre X, genre X is the niche.

Modifié par MerinTB, 01 décembre 2010 - 05:33 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

MerinTB wrote...

ErichHartmann wrote...
BG I and II both sold over 2 million copies. Nothing niche or under performing about those sales figures.

RPGs were not as small a niche in 2000.  FPS hadn't completely climbed to the top of the heap yet.  Halo came out in 2001, and I would argue it was around 2001-2002 that FPS became the dominant game genre, building on what Doom started and Half-Life successfully exploded.  It was also the XBOX joining the PS2 and the Gamecube, making it a three-way market again BUT the American console focusing on the FPS genre strongly, that created the biggest boom in console gaming (where, yes, most of that market was PS2 at the time but XBOX grew the market a lot.)

BG 1 and 2 were created when cRPGs were, more or less, closest to  king they'd ever be.  Diablo had real legs (action RPG or no), Final Fantasy 7 hit the world like an asteroid, Fallout was a huge success (really, 1997 was near the peak for cRPGs...)  but discounting JPRGs, cRPGs were at best like the fifth best selling genre at their height.

BG 1 and 2 combined sold over 5 million copies (to date), and that was a nice feat in the day - but it could be called more niche when compared to sales of games that came out before BG2:
The Sims - best selling PC game for a long time, currently at 13 million copies
Myst - previous best selling PC game, came out in 1993, 6 million.
Half-life - something like 9 million copies
Starcraft - 11 million

They was on track with Diablo (2.5 million by 2001) and Diablo 2, more or less (4 million) but behind all contemporary Final Fantasy's - FFVII (over 9 million) through  FFX (6.6 million).

BG's numbers would good, and they are "better in 1997-2000" than Mass Effect or Dragon Age's numbers are in the late 2000's early 2010's, but when compared to "top-sellers" of the time, they were down in the niche. 

Adventure games outsold cRPGs, FPS not near the height of their popularity outsold cRPGs, RTS outsold cRPGs.  When you have a dying genre, a birthing genre and a stable genre all outselling genre X, genre X is the niche.

How dare you use logic Merin on the internet of all places?

[AlanC9]

MerinTB wrote...

You're misinterpreting me.

Only because your language is twisted. When you say...

BioWare moved OUT of the niche and into the mainstream - by that I mean they were making (ignoring Shattered Steel and MDK2 for the moment) cRPGs but when the console market grew they started working on console RPGs with more and more of an actiony bent to them.  

.... you don't mean that Bioware ever was in a niche, since (that variety of) CRPGs weren't a niche when they did them. When what they were doing became a niche, they did something different.

Since you're not actually saying that Bioware was ever in a niche, the phrase "BioWare moved OUT of the niche" is ill-advised at best, actively misleading at worst. I suppose it could be saved by saying "Bioware moved out of what was fast becoming a niche," but really, you'd be better off saying something more like "Bioware moved out of 'old school CRPGs.' " Sure, that gets you dragged into the whole fight about what 'old school CRPGs' are, but that's the substance of your point anyway, so you might as well actually have the fight rather than skate around it.

BioWare's not the same as it's always been - like any company, they add people and people leave.  Their fanbase hasn't changed - they are just trying to add a different market segment to their fanbase.

Of course, in that sense no large company is ever the same as it has always been. But I'll be more precise. Bio has always been about making A-list games, with strong stories, characters, and dialog. We can throw a few more qualifiers on that if you like. Edit: needs something about combat, at least,  since as it stands I could be talking about Grim Fandango.

Dr. Greg Zeschuk has been quoted as saying that Wasteland is his favorite game.  Wasteland is absolutely a classic RPG, and one of my favorite games ever as well.

Dr. Ray Muzyka said his favorite game was System Shock - so it's no surprise where all the story / adventure gaming aspects of BioWare games come from.

I'd say a found listing a seminole classic RPG as his favorite game shows that he must have liked most of those classic RPG "hallmarks" as you call them.

Sure, but we don't know why they liked those games. As this board has abundantly demonstrated, people can like a game for entirely different reasons. What Greg liked about Wasteland may have little to do with what you liked about it.

Amusing AutoCorrect error there, btw.

Modifié par AlanC9, 01 décembre 2010 - 05:46 .

[ErichHartmann]

Comparing BG sales to some of the top all time selling PC games still doesn't qualify as "niche". If the sales were less than a million then your point might be relevant.  

Modifié par ErichHartmann, 01 décembre 2010 - 05:42 .

[Gemini1179]

As far as companions outfits, all I can say is this- post release "Companion Alternate Clothing/Armor Pack" for only 160 MS/BW/PS points...

[AlanC9]

ErichHartmann wrote...

Comparing BG sales to some of the top all time selling PC games still doesn't qualify as "niche". If the sales were less than a million then your point might be relevant.  

You see, Merin? When you talk about Bio moving out of a niche, it implies that they had been in a niche. You can't rely on someone reading posts that aren't addressed to him to clear this sort of thing up.

[Ryzaki]

Gemini1179 wrote...

As far as companions outfits, all I can say is this- post release "Companion Alternate Clothing/Armor Pack" for only 160 MS/BW/PS points...

And watch Isabela's AO have some pants.

[MerinTB]

ErichHartmann wrote...
Comparing BG sales to some of the top all time selling PC games still doesn't qualify as "niche". If the sales were less than a million then your point might be relevant.  

Comparing the cRPG genre to other genres is exactly how you define niche - and you define niche as being a smaller subsection of a market.  cRPGs post 1980's (and probably even then and earlier) were never the mainstream game genre of choice.

To decide what is a niche genre, you look at the list of genres - and cRPGs don't sell anywhere near where other genres have (adventure) or do (FPS, RTS).  Sports and racing beat cRPGs in sales, too.

Why does a million in sales equal some benchmark?  Are you pulling that from industry standards?  Some critical analysis written by a professor somewhere?

Or is that in your own estimation?

The BG series is one of the best selling cRPG series around, no doubt.  But it being near the top, yet way underperforming games from other genres, is exactly prove that cRPGs are niche.

I can't believe anyone is arguing that cRPGs aren't niche, but whatever.

[MerinTB]

AlanC9 wrote...

ErichHartmann wrote...
Comparing BG sales to some of the top all time selling PC games still doesn't qualify as "niche". If the sales were less than a million then your point might be relevant.  

You see, Merin? When you talk about Bio moving out of a niche, it implies that they had been in a niche. You can't rely on someone reading posts that aren't addressed to him to clear this sort of thing up.

How does ErichHartmann's "million copies sold" benchmark prove that that I should rely on someone reading posts not addressed to...

wait, ok.  You mean I should just accept that people will misinterpret what I post, whether willfully or not?

That I already knew.

[Rawgrim]

Pirated games are ALOT more accessible now adays though. I am sure that might be a factor in sales now, compared to back then.

[ENolan]

I had to post it. Hopefully it offers something to the arguments.

[Matchy Pointy]

Noy sure what the argument is here anymore, kinda veered off-topic

Modifié par Matchy Pointy, 01 décembre 2010 - 07:22 .

[Aermas]

Stop talking about RPG's, that is NOT what this topic is about. The topic is why the hell is "armor" not being used realistically or "Internally Consistently" within the game.

[Matchy Pointy]

So, you are saying that anyone that goes into battle without armour is unrealistic? I think history would like to know that.

[Aermas]

No, I'm saying letting Isabela take less damage from something than Armored Aveline is unrealistic!