those clichés are hardly fair - for example: it's an RPG, so character progression is required, hence the games often have characters start from humble beginnings. In order to generate an epic story and realise a world the player character must interact with characters, a few of them in depth, visit different locations and have emotional investment in the threat that drives the game forward. They must also be equipped to do so. Hence - in keeping the game a story and character driven RPG many of those clichés are NECESSARY.Beaner28 wrote...
Dragon Age II, in all seriousness, will most likely end up being yet another one of BioWare's derivative and mindless, cliche ridden masterpieces. The real issue here is that BioWare's endless recycling of rudimentary plots, coupled with the banality of Mr. Gaider's writing ultimately tends to be a tart and pathetic excuse for emotionally engaging stories- the entirety of BioWare's mission statement as makers of interactive media.
Forms of declination, reverse revolution if you will, from true RPGs to mindless and generic "hack n' slash" action aimed at the low IQ crowd is not really improving upon or pushing the envelope of the RPG genre. BioWare's Dragon Age II will most certainly end up being a spectacular failure in that endeavor.
Some criticisms of their plots are valid. For example the same golem twist is present in multiple games. That has no gameplay justification.
The hack-and-slash gameplay you seem to hate so much has very little to do with the story. While that may be a problem, increased options during combat will not improve the story which is the topic being discussed
Modifié par tenshi_no_hone, 11 janvier 2011 - 12:42 .





Retour en haut.gif)






