495 réponses à ce sujet

[crimzontearz]

so monica, aside from the fact that I could argue all your points (and I did before) if you are THAT displeased with all of DA2........why are you here?

[Maria Caliban]

I liked the armor and upgrade system in Mass Effect 2.

I like that each of my companions has their own, unique look. I like that I don't have to bother with their armor. I like that the upgrades are automatically applied.

For me, finding upgrades during a mission is fun. Sitting at the inventory screen and switching out the armor is not fun. Especially when I have 8 teammates who I all have to look after.

Given that there's group inventory, you'd think the companions would be smart enough to go 'I have boots that give +2 to dex and we just found boots that give +3, I'm going to put those on' but they can't even manage that. This is part of the reason the ME system appeals to me.

You see 'role-playing.' I see 'busy-work.' You see 'customization.' I see 'companions placed in the role of toddlers in order to add filler to the game.'

It's fine to dislike specific designs. I see nothing wrong with Isabela's outfit, but I can appreciate that others want her to wear pants or something that looks like armor. And I appreciate that people would prefer more outfits. I feel the same. If Isabela had 5-7 options, that would be cool.

I suspect that after the game, my main complaint will be that this isn't *more* like ME 2. In ME 2, you mined for minerals that you could use to upgrade specific companion's powers, abilities, weapons, and armor. You could also buy team wide upgrades or find them on missions. I find all that satisfying.

[upsettingshorts]

I shake my head every time I read the thread title. Mass Effect 2 isn't a disease.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 28 décembre 2010 - 02:57 .

[Matchy Pointy]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I liked the armor and upgrade system in Mass Effect 2.

I like that each of my companions has their own, unique look. I like that I don't have to bother with their armor. I like that the upgrades are automatically applied.

For me, finding upgrades during a mission is fun. Sitting at the inventory screen and switching out the armor is not fun. Especially when I have 8 teammates who I all have to look after.

Given that there's group inventory, you'd think the companions would be smart enough to go 'I have boots that give +2 to dex and we just found boots that give +3, I'm going to put those on' but they can't even manage that. This is part of the reason the ME system appeals to me.

You see 'role-playing.' I see 'busy-work.' You see 'customization.' I see 'companions placed in the role of toddlers in order to add filler to the game.'

It's fine to dislike specific designs. I see nothing wrong with Isabela's outfit, but I can appreciate that others want her to wear pants or something that looks like armor. And I appreciate that people would prefer more outfits. I feel the same. If Isabela had 5-7 options, that would be cool.

I suspect that after the game, my main complaint will be that this isn't *more* like ME 2. In ME 2, you mined for minerals that you could use to upgrade specific companion's powers, abilities, weapons, and armor. You could also buy team wide upgrades or find them on missions. I find all that satisfying.

I agree wth most of what you say, I loved the outfit/upgrade system in ME2, and as I said before, i like the fixed outfits of copanions, I'd rahther have they have unique look then to have them all look pretty much the same all the time.

[ViSeiRa]

Um a Syndrome isn't a disease, it is defined:

In medicine and psychology, a syndrome is the association of several clinically recognizable features, signs (observed by a physician), symptoms (reported by the patient), phenomena or characteristics that often occur together, so that the presence of one feature alerts the physician to the presence of the others. In recent decades, the term has been used outside medicine to refer to a combination of phenomena seen in association.

Modifié par ViSeirA, 28 décembre 2010 - 03:03 .

[upsettingshorts]

Yes, and based on the content of the OP - I'm sure he didn't want to give that impression at all. "Met with disgust" and "take a hint." Right.

[highcastle]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I liked the armor and upgrade system in Mass Effect 2.

I like that each of my companions has their own, unique look. I like that I don't have to bother with their armor. I like that the upgrades are automatically applied.

For me, finding upgrades during a mission is fun. Sitting at the inventory screen and switching out the armor is not fun. Especially when I have 8 teammates who I all have to look after.

Given that there's group inventory, you'd think the companions would be smart enough to go 'I have boots that give +2 to dex and we just found boots that give +3, I'm going to put those on' but they can't even manage that. This is part of the reason the ME system appeals to me.

You see 'role-playing.' I see 'busy-work.' You see 'customization.' I see 'companions placed in the role of toddlers in order to add filler to the game.'

It's fine to dislike specific designs. I see nothing wrong with Isabela's outfit, but I can appreciate that others want her to wear pants or something that looks like armor. And I appreciate that people would prefer more outfits. I feel the same. If Isabela had 5-7 options, that would be cool.

I suspect that after the game, my main complaint will be that this isn't *more* like ME 2. In ME 2, you mined for minerals that you could use to upgrade specific companion's powers, abilities, weapons, and armor. You could also buy team wide upgrades or find them on missions. I find all that satisfying.

I understand the points your making, but for me there's a middle ground between "busy work" and "no customization." Having no say in what my companions are wearing, or seeing them parade around in inappropriate outfits is rather disappointing. And it's not made better when it's lampshaded in their loyalty quests. *cough*Miranda*cough*

I think what the first ME did right was have specific armors for specific species. It's kind of silly to have a Turian and a human fit into the sam gear. If people found it tedious to keep swapping out armor every level or so, a handful of armors could have been designed for each character or each species. And let them be upgradable. I too think upgrades work fine. But variety is the spice of life. All the characters already had unlockable looks. How hard would it have been to scatter them as loot instead of rewarding them as loyalty bonuses?

Customization is a staple of an RPG. I just think some middle ground could've been found. It's not a make-it-or-break-it issue for me, but it is something I'm going to miss in DA2. 

[ViSeiRa]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Yes, and based on the content of the OP - I'm sure he didn't want to give that impression at all. "Met with disgust" and "take a hint." Right.

"Disgust" and "Take a hint" can't even be considered related to the OP's subject, I'm sure he meant it was something that occured time after time that it became sort of a "syndrome" which as I described before can be any sort of characteristics the occur together and define something, not just diseases.

[Maria Caliban]

The OP was trollin'. Whatever they meant, it was supposed to be inflammatory.

[soteria]

wwwwowwww wrote...
I understand limitations need to be made, and with everyone clamoring about not following the rules that are set by old school pnp D&D style games, why is this one thing continuing to be the norm? This is a rule set out by the creator of D&D as we know it and it still exists, why is that?

Er, maybe you missed the part where I said the real reason is and always has been for balance? Anything else is simply justification after the fact, hence the sarcasm.

Two rings is an arbitrary limit that we're used to and makes a certain amount of sense given that most of us have two hands. Why not complain about wearing only one amulet or belt? Wearing two is perfectly conceivable. It's as silly to complain about wearing two rings as it is to complain about any other facet of the magic system. We can't raise dead or teleport or cast mordenaiken's globe of disjunction or wear three magic rings in Thedas because that's not how magic works in the setting.

Why should they change the limit? What's the benefit? From a balance/gameplay point of view, two rings is a good limit because it allows variety but still forces you to make meaningful choices about what you wear. Additionally, it allows them to make rings with significant bonuses, something they wouldn't do if you could wear a bunch of them. Imagine if you could wear four rings in DA:O, for a minute. Now, imagine trying to find four decent rings for all your companions to wear, too.

Modifié par soteria, 28 décembre 2010 - 03:17 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I liked the armor and upgrade system in Mass Effect 2.

I like that each of my companions has their own, unique look. I like that I don't have to bother with their armor. I like that the upgrades are automatically applied.

For me, finding upgrades during a mission is fun. Sitting at the inventory screen and switching out the armor is not fun. Especially when I have 8 teammates who I all have to look after.

Given that there's group inventory, you'd think the companions would be smart enough to go 'I have boots that give +2 to dex and we just found boots that give +3, I'm going to put those on' but they can't even manage that. This is part of the reason the ME system appeals to me.

You see 'role-playing.' I see 'busy-work.' You see 'customization.' I see 'companions placed in the role of toddlers in order to add filler to the game.'

It's fine to dislike specific designs. I see nothing wrong with Isabela's outfit, but I can appreciate that others want her to wear pants or something that looks like armor. And I appreciate that people would prefer more outfits. I feel the same. If Isabela had 5-7 options, that would be cool.

I suspect that after the game, my main complaint will be that this isn't *more* like ME 2. In ME 2, you mined for minerals that you could use to upgrade specific companion's powers, abilities, weapons, and armor. You could also buy team wide upgrades or find them on missions. I find all that satisfying.

Having a party based CRPG is just that, controling and outfitting an enitre "party", party being the key word. ME2 didn't have much of an upgrade system at all, and what was there was pretty terrible, what with the awful planet scanning mini game if you can even call it that,  for resources and lack of info regarding what research and upgrades actually do in terms of added damage and the like.

Otherwise you may as well be playing something like Fallout or Risen where you're just controling one character.
If people want to play action games, go play action games, do the rest of us a favor and stop encouraging Bioware to dumb their RPG's down for the masses/casual gamer. I think there's plenty of studios that do that already.

[upsettingshorts]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Having a party based CRPG is just that, controling and outfitting an enitre "party", party being the key word.

And some people played party based cRPGs despite this concept, not because of it. 

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

ME2 didn't have much of an upgrade system at all, and what was there was pretty terrible

Reasonable people can disagree over how well implemented it was - and I'm not going to be on the favorable side - but the system definitely existed and definitely made a difference.  Try playing Mass Effect 2 without using any upgrades.  It's like sticking with the starter equipment in ME1 for the whole game.

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

what with the awful planet scanning mini game if you can even call it that,  for resources

I don't like how ME1 did resources either, so I couldn't hate planet scanning all that much.  Plus I always imported L60 toons so I probably didn't have to scan as much as many.

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

and lack of info regarding what research and upgrades actually do in terms of added damage and the like.

Definitely a problem, and one Christina Norman has acknowledged (at least on Twitter).

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Otherwise you may as well be playing something like Fallout or Risen where you're just controling one character.
If people want to play action games, go play action games, do the rest of us a favor and stop encouraging Bioware to dumb their RPG's down for the masses/casual gamer. I think there's plenty of studios that do that already.

A single-PC game is no more or less complicated or "dumb" than a party based cRPG.  The difference comes down to - I think - people wanting to play a cRPG in which they control only one character directly and the others are NPCs they interact with.  

I want the protagonist to be the only PC as well, but it's not because I find party based systems too complicated or too hardcore - just because I prefer to think of the party members as NPCs, not an extension of the PC. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 28 décembre 2010 - 03:30 .

[soteria]

"Disgust" and "Take a hint" can't even be considered related to the OP's subject, I'm sure he meant it was something that occured time after time that it became sort of a "syndrome" which as I described before can be any sort of characteristics the occur together and define something, not just diseases.

Yes, "syndrome" just means a set of symptoms that run together, but the point of the word is that those symptoms point to the presence of a disease. And, considering that Tourette's and AIDS are both "syndromes," I don't think it's unreasonable at all to think of a syndrome as something like a disease--especially considering the context of the intentionally inflammatory post.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Thats not how it works though Angry, like I said, its considered party based for a reason, I can't fathom why people are trying to force Bioware to strip functionality out just due to them finding it too "complicated" to not be hand held and have no need to upgrade their party's equipment over the course of the game. Its not rocket science and it really isn't that complicated, especially since we're not using something like a D&D 2.0 type of sytem with Thaco and the like.



It's bad enough DA2 no longer has a ton of customization the first game had, along with entire systems like fatigue playing a part being stripped out because its "too complicated" Seriously the current trend when it comes to RPG's of streamlining them to hell and back, really needs to stop.

[crimzontearz]

Sarah you do realize that there is adistinction between the concept of a RPG (role playing game......playing a role in other words) and the system and mechanics of the game part of the equation right?



just because some elements are different (like full party costumization) that does not make DA2 any less of an RPG....



Is VtR any less of an RPG than D&D because its progression does not involve levels or the health system is based on helth levels and not hit points?



come on Sarah...

[Cutlasskiwi]

Monica83 wrote...

Well the combat system its not improved at all... With that silly anime and bad done animation and that teleport moves... Its strange how someone can see it improved...... I respect your opinion but for me dragon age 2 don't have nothing improved from origins..

Its going to be shorter..
Have a schematic dialog system...
Maybe the new graphic can be nice but we don't see enought of that
Have a static hemm "distinct" class system
Outfit of companion are static but upgradable.. ((but they still remain static))
Silly line and shiny effects on move...
An perfect hack and slash gameplay with a ridicolus teleport system
And silly trash combat animation that seems taken from dinasty warrior...

The only positive thing and not so great innovation for me is the voiced character....

Improved from origins?
naaaaah

I have not been able to try the demo and I know that you have but from what I've seen so far the combat looks better. I prefer faster combat instead of doing the shuffle like you ended up doing in DAO but that's just me and not everyone is going to like the new combat system.

Does length beat quality in you books? So far we don't really know a lot about game content and what kind of quests there will be. I don't see the game being shorter as a disadvantage as long as we get quality content. A lot of the side quest felt pretty much the same to me in DAO so if they've changed that I'll be a happy camper. 

I may regret asking this but how is DAII a hack and slash game? I really don't see it. 

[ViSeiRa]

Maria Caliban wrote...

The OP was trollin'. Whatever they meant, it was supposed to be inflammatory.

Well, I just needed to clarify that up.

Awesome vid though, seems like this "Boxxy" has a long history with 4Chan and anonymous:bandit:, at least according to Encyclopediadramatica lol.

Anyway to stay on topic, @OP: who said that the companion outfits was bad idea? it was a brilliant idea that was executed horribly, first these should have been armor not "latex" outfits like the ones Miranda wore or simply an upper naked body with tattoos like Jack, these could have been acceptable on the Normandy but not outside in planets with extreme tempratures and gang wars, also they needed more variety but the idea itself is worthwhile, it adds a lot of character.

Modifié par ViSeirA, 28 décembre 2010 - 03:42 .

[soteria]

Sarah wrote...

...I can't fathom why people are trying to force Bioware to strip functionality out just due to them finding it too "complicated" to not be hand held and have no need to upgrade their party's equipment over the course of the game...

Let me help you. It has nothing to do with getting rid of functionality--it's because they don't like that feature and would prefer Bioware worked on something else. I don't like orange because it's just so... orangey, and stuff, not because I'm a red fanboy and think orange is too complex (man, why'd they have to combine red and yellow? that stuff way too hard to understand).

[upsettingshorts]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Thats not how it works though Angry, like I said, its considered party based for a reason

And that reason is tradition. 

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

I can't fathom why people are trying to force Bioware to strip functionality out just due to them finding it too "complicated" to not be hand held and have no need to upgrade their party's equipment over the course of the game.

I can't speak for other people, but that isn't my reason for endorsing unique outfits for companions.   Though of course I'd prefer to be able to pick from more than 1-2 options.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

crimzontearz wrote...

Sarah you do realize that there is adistinction between the concept of a RPG (role playing game......playing a role in other words) and the system and mechanics of the game part of the equation right?

just because some elements are different (like full party costumization) that does not make DA2 any less of an RPG....

Is VtR any less of an RPG than D&D because its progression does not involve levels or the health system is based on helth levels and not hit points?

come on Sarah...

I realize that, the thing is DA2 IS a  party based CRPG. With half of the traditional elements that make up a typical party based CPRG stripped out or streamlined to the point of ridiculousness in the first place. What I'm annoyed at is people like Maria who actively encourage that type of garbage like its a good thing.

Thats without even getting into the reduction of personal roleplaying one can do because of a set protagonist and voice overs that pretty much paint a specific flow when it comes to the player's responses. Yet another ME2 element that DA really didn't need.

I don't know what was so wrong with keeping DA, DA and keeping ME, ME. They sold about the same amount of copies, I highly doubt ME2'ing up DA2 is going to bring in a ton of more sales. DA:O stood fairly well on its own as a start of a series that was throwing a bone to folks who were waiting for another Bioware RPG along the lines of BG or NWN.  The idea of that particular design direction lasting a whole one game before being striped downed and streamlined and pushed out in 18 months leaves a pretty terrible taste in my mouth.

[upsettingshorts]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

I realize that, the thing is DA2 IS a  party based CRPG. With half of the traditional elements that make up a typical party based CPRG stripped out or streamlined to the point of ridiculousness in the first place. What I'm annoyed at is people like Maria who actively encourage that type of garbage like its a good thing.

How dare she have her opinions?

The party based cRPG as you imagine it does not have an inherent right to exist.  But then I've never really understood people who only enjoy one type of game only, so I can't really relate.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 28 décembre 2010 - 03:47 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

I realize that, the thing is DA2 IS a  party based CRPG. With half of the traditional elements that make up a typical party based CPRG stripped out or streamlined to the point of ridiculousness in the first place. What I'm annoyed at is people like Maria who actively encourage that type of garbage like its a good thing.

How dare she have her opinions?

The party based cRPG as you imagine it does not have an inherent right to exist.  

Well that particular brand of party based CPRG did fairly well for itself for the past decade or so, DA:O's sales numbers suggest that type of title will still sell fairly well.

Basically what you're saying is BG/BG2/NWN Icewind Dale and the like had no right to exist and are terrible games.

[soteria]

The party based cRPG as you imagine it does not have an inherent right to exist.

Yes! Drive it into the sea! That imperialistic "party" should have perished long ago! Action RPG! Action RPG! Action RPG...

[upsettingshorts]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Basically what you're saying is BG/BG2/NWN Icewind Dale and the like had no right to exist and are terrible games.

No, I'm saying doing things the way they've always done for the sake of it is a pretty terrible justification in of itself. 

Also what I'm saying is that despite the fact Bioware has made lots of party-based cRPGs they are not obligated to continue to provide them, nor should any fans of theirs feel obligated to defend or endorse every feature ever presented in their games.

soteria wrote...

Yes! Drive it into the sea! That imperialistic "party" should have perished long ago! Action RPG! Action RPG! Action RPG...

I consider action RPGs those that implement twitch mechanics, which has nothing to do with the current discussion.

If you want to mock my position, a more accurate way would be to say "protagonist focused!" or something.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 28 décembre 2010 - 03:52 .