299 réponses à ce sujet

[Lusitanum]

Saibh wrote...
He complains about everything.

Anything Yahtzee says is invalidated as an external source because he deliberately exaggerates and picks on things. I'm just saying, if you have to pull out something Yahtzee said to prove your point, you've done it wrong.

I could refute your point by saying that just because someone focuses solely on the bad things doesn't mean that he's not right on the fact those are aspects of the game that could have been better, but I don't need to. I'll just let you refute yourself:

Saibh wrote...

He even admitted it was an excellent game.

So what now? If he complains about everything, then why did he say that?

And if anything he says is invalidated, then does that also invalidate your own argument about him admitting that it was a good game?

Or does that mean that, by invalidating his statement, then he though DA wasn't a good game and just said that to actually criticize it (because apparently that's all he does) since he didn't actually like it and is just saying that it's good in order to say it's bad to cause a few laughs at the expense of those who think it's good when it's actually incredibly bad and oh my God why is the room spinning?

Il Divo wrote...

However notice instead once we make the
jump to 3D the kinds of abilities that Bioware began to include. Kotor's
power attack allows the character to do a somersault complete with a
smash attack or even Force Storm.

Yeah, and even then I often chose NOT to pick Power Attack, not because of stats, but just because of how goofy the animation looked. I even remember thinking that Zaalbar was the only that was able to do that move properly: he just made a very powerful-looking swing with his sword.

There, a power attack, no need to make the stupid, phisically impossible sommersault. And the difference is that, back then, we could forgive that sort of thing, it was already amazing that a fight actually looked like a fight. Nowadays, I think we're entitled to expect a bit more.

Il Divo wrote...

In Jade Empire, you are able to chain
back/front lips endlessly while taking on multiple opponents armed with
swords.

Because then, you're actually in a kung-fu setting, backflips and gracious acrobatics are kind of what you want to see in that kind of setting. If you give me the same kind of combat in DA, I'm going to have to kill someone to make the pain go away <_<.

Il Divo wrote...

Mass Effect 2's charge ability.

Which happened due to a mix of future technology and biotics. And it was just mere charge attack, Shepard never actually started piroueting or firing his weapons with one hand over his shoulder or anything like that just because it looked "cool".

Modifié par Lusitanum, 15 janvier 2011 - 11:48 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Ziggeh wrote...

TMZuk wrote...
Over the Top Fantastic works very poorly with Dark and Gritty. It makes it impossible, for me anyway, to suspend that by now famed disbelief.

I don't believe you. I think you've decided that this is your personal line based on preference, which isn't the same as rendered incapable. Humans have great capacity for disbelief.

TMZuk is right tough..

And if you don't aunderstand way - it's for hte same reason drama and comedy don't get fumbled together.
Even if there are dramatic and comedic moment in a single picture, they don't happen one right after another, or one right during other.

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...
Not even close. The point was that despite PJ took flak for those type of scenes it ultimately didn't matter showing it's irrlevant just as the flak DA2 is taking at this point by the purists is also irrelevant. Did I need to make a special note that the flak PJ got from the scenes that took great liberties didn't matter? I thought that was universally accepted.

Yes. On this forum, many people take the purist position to be the desired one. I assumed that with your stance on realism, you would be against departures from source material.

However, I think we are both capable of remembering that TheMadCat doesn't do that. He often represents positions that he personally doesn't support, and I should have remembered that in this thread.

[AlanC9]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And if you don't aunderstand way - it's for hte same reason drama and comedy don't get fumbled together.
Even if there are dramatic and comedic moment in a single picture, they don't happen one right after another, or one right during other.

Really? I could have sworn I've seen that happen on several episodes of Buffy.

It's a terrible metaphor for what Ziggeh's talking about, anyway.

[AlexXIV]

I don't get this 'over the top' thing. Was Revan 'over the top' in KotOR? Yes he was. Was the spirit monk over the top in Jade Empire? Yes. Is Shepard over the top in Mass Effect? Yes. Was the Warden over the top? Yes. Will Hawke be over the top? Yes. Notice something? No? Too bad.

[Ziggeh]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
TMZuk is right tough..

No, he's not, because it's not impossible. "Harder" we could discuss, but that's a conversation about the nature of the viewer and relationships with the medium, and not about DA2.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
And if you don't aunderstand way - it's for hte same reason drama and comedy don't get fumbled together.
Even if there are dramatic and comedic moment in a single picture, they don't happen one right after another, or one right during other.

Seriously? This happens all the time. I don't even need to think to find an example; I'm watching supernatural right now, they do it a couple of times an episode.

[Ziggeh]

AlexXIV wrote...

I don't get this 'over the top' thing. Was Revan 'over the top' in KotOR? Yes he was. Was the spirit monk over the top in Jade Empire? Yes. Is Shepard over the top in Mass Effect? Yes. Was the Warden over the top? Yes. Will Hawke be over the top? Yes. Notice something? No? Too bad.

Indeed, the "top" is also subjective.

[Liablecocksman]

Ziggeh wrote...
Seriously? This happens all the time. I don't even need to think to find an example; I'm watching supernatural right now, they do it a couple of times an episode.

I am not familiar with that series, so I cannot comment on it specifically.

What I can add, however, is a better phrasing of what I think was the intended meaning of Lotion Soronnars post:
You can easily have changes in tone in a game(or movie, in his example) but you hold them distinct, and do not try to introduce some sort of comedic element into an otherwise serious situation.

You can easily have "over-the-top", "cartoony" The Protagonist is The One combat, but you will have to admit it is a serious change of pace, if you've just come out of a serious, thought-provoking dialogue choice. Especially when you try to establish the rest of your gameworld as dark and bleak using real-world concepts such as racism, discrimination, slavery, poverty and rape.

I don't personally think it fits within the rest of the setting at all, and would much rather have the stiff and uninspired combat animations of DA:O. Ideally, I think, some sort of compromise would have been reached.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 16 janvier 2011 - 12:39 .

[Chuvvy]

No, SSX Deadly Decent is trying way to hard. I thought it was another generic grimdark shooter for the first ten seconds of the trailer.

[AlexXIV]

Liable****sman wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...
Seriously? This happens all the time. I don't even need to think to find an example; I'm watching supernatural right now, they do it a couple of times an episode.

I am not familiar with that series, so I cannot comment on it specifically.

What I can add, however, is a better phrasing of what I think was the intended meaning of Lotion Soronnars post:
You can easily have changes in tone in a game(or movie, in his example) but you hold them distinct, and try to introduce some sort of comedic element into an otherwise serious situation.

You can easily have "over-the-top", "cartoony" The Protagonist is The One combat, but you will have to admit it is a serious change of pace, if you've just come out of a serious, thought-provoking dialogue choice. Especially when you try to establish the rest of your gameworld as dark and bleak using real-world concepts such as racism, discrimination, slavery, poverty and rape.

I don't personally think it fits within the rest of the setting at all, and would much rather have the stiff and uninspired combat animations of DA:O. Ideally, I think, some sort of compromise would have been reached.

Sorry but you're saving the world or changing the world or something along that magnitude. I find it rather ridiculous to have hero who is unspectacular and achieving this as in opposite to have a hero who can account for hundret others in a battle. Always if I think about DA:O where you kill about 1000 mobs during the game, you get to think yeah he killed thousands but only because they neatly lined up in a row waiting to get their turn to get owned. It is somehow same-same. One way you have to accept that your enemy is sending his forces ins small groups so you can manage and in the other way you have to accept your hero could dive into a group of 100 people and kill them all. It both requires suspesion of belief, just that if you have a hero who is worth a hundret normal people in a battle then you don't have to think 'why is my enemy so stupid'?

[Liablecocksman]

PureMethodActor wrote...
My problems with DA2 thus far are the combat, lack of inventory (like ME2),

The inventory will be identical to that of Dragon Age: Origins.

inability to equip weapons/armor on party members

You will be able to upgrade the weapons of your companions(as long as they fit their style. 2h weapons for fenris, sword and shield for Avelina, etc.) and all of their accessory slots, such as their necklace, belt, rings, etc.

[rabidhanar]

To continue this arguement, i also think that the rogue movements are highly rediculous.



The dropkick potion thing was crazy, as was the charge ability...he didn't even hit them, the opponents just fell over.



If i want to see over the top acrobatics, i will play Jade Empire or an anime game, not Dragon Age origins. Some moves in the original were like this too and it annoyed me (Rogue AOE backstab ability anyone, forgot name sorry) I am going to test out the abilities before I use them, some will not be used for this very reason.

[Liablecocksman]

AlexXIV wrote...
Sorry but you're saving the world or changing the world or something along that magnitude. I find it rather ridiculous to have hero who is unspectacular and achieving this as in opposite to have a hero who can account for hundret others in a battle. Always if I think about DA:O where you kill about 1000 mobs during the game, you get to think yeah he killed thousands but only because they neatly lined up in a row waiting to get their turn to get owned. It is somehow same-same. One way you have to accept that your enemy is sending his forces ins small groups so you can manage and in the other way you have to accept your hero could dive into a group of 100 people and kill them all. It both requires suspesion of belief, just that if you have a hero who is worth a hundret normal people in a battle then you don't have to think 'why is my enemy so stupid'?

You want some sort of overpowered hero who can kill 100 enemies without breaking a sweat? That's extremely silly. You might as well stop playing RPGs and instead devote your time to Prototype. I have it for the Xbox360 - it's an awesome game.

Laying that to rest, I think you should rethink your justification.
"Unspectacular" hero is not OK because the enemy is sending darkspawn at you in waves varying from 5 to 10?
"Spectacular" hero is OK because the enemy is sending 100 darkspawn at a time?

You realise that you won't be fighting 100 monters at a time in DA2, right, and that you will not be able to kill all monters with ease, using only the main character?
You are not getting an overpowered main character - you are getting a main character who is as relatively weak as he was in Origins, he just fights using different animations.

[Soul Cool]

Lusitanum wrote...
 Am I the only one who thinks that Dragon Age 2 is just trying way too hard to look flashy and exciting and the expense of looking competely ridiculous?

Not hard enough. Reality is very boring. I'd rather have flashy, exciting, and ridiculous over-the-top stabbity-ness of awesome + 9,000 than anything approaching 'realistic' combat in a game based on swords, arrows, and magic.

[Ziggeh]

Liable****sman wrote...
Especially when you try to establish the rest of your gameworld as dark and bleak using real-world concepts such as racism, discrimination, slavery, poverty and rape.

There isn't a contradiction between stylised and bleak, and certainly not with dark. There is with realism, but there was a whole topic 'bout that just the other day.

Liable****sman wrote...
I don't personally think it fits within the rest of the setting at all, and would much rather have the stiff and uninspired combat animations of DA:O. Ideally, I think, some sort of compromise would have been reached.

Personally, it certainly looks like they went too far for my prefence, but it will definitely increase accessability in return for something that I'm not terribly concerned about.

[Liablecocksman]

Ziggeh wrote...
There isn't a contradiction between stylised and bleak, and certainly not with dark. There is with realism, but there was a whole topic 'bout that just the other day.

Aye, indeed.
I would just connect the dots, myself.
Dark/Bleak connects to realism. If the setting is unbelievable, we are unable to care.
"Stylised combat" conflicts with realism, and thus (indirectly) conflicts with a dark and bleak setting.

That's the case I'm trying to make, anyway.

Personally, it certainly looks like they went too far for my prefence, but it will definitely increase accessability in return for something that I'm not terribly concerned about.

Certainly!
I agree with your statement here one-hundred percent.
I don't care much about the animations myself, and it will certainly make the game more accessible - or provide more incentive for a purchase to a whole other portion of the market, that likes over-the-top combat, anyway.

[TheMadCat]

In Exile wrote...

Yes. On this forum, many people take the purist position to be the desired one. I assumed that with your stance on realism, you would be against departures from source material.

Except in regards to combat I don't hold the source material in high regards and certainly not at any level of realism, I think I've told you that before. I thought it was clunky and clumsy and with the design paying a bit more homage to D&D then I would have liked, concerning itself more with archtypes rather then stats and positional contact. My problems with the new system is it's still more concerned about archtypes rather then stats and positional contact, it's just instead of being clunky and clumsy it's now over-done and silly, in my opinion anyways. 

AlanC9 wrote...

However, I think we are both capable of
remembering that TheMadCat doesn't do that. He often represents
positions that he personally doesn't support, and I should have
remembered that in this thread.

Usually, yeah. This case though as I noted above I'm not really supportive of either system. The root of problem from my perspective is still there and all the fancy animations and lights aren't going to cover it up. But my original intent was to show that opinions of the minority, regardless of the media and size of the fan base are ultimately meaningless. PJ movies recieved a ton of criticism from the purists and that's amounted to little more then occasional forums rants.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 16 janvier 2011 - 01:26 .

[AlexXIV]

Liable****sman wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Sorry but you're saving the world or changing the world or something along that magnitude. I find it rather ridiculous to have hero who is unspectacular and achieving this as in opposite to have a hero who can account for hundret others in a battle. Always if I think about DA:O where you kill about 1000 mobs during the game, you get to think yeah he killed thousands but only because they neatly lined up in a row waiting to get their turn to get owned. It is somehow same-same. One way you have to accept that your enemy is sending his forces ins small groups so you can manage and in the other way you have to accept your hero could dive into a group of 100 people and kill them all. It both requires suspesion of belief, just that if you have a hero who is worth a hundret normal people in a battle then you don't have to think 'why is my enemy so stupid'?

You want some sort of overpowered hero who can kill 100 enemies without breaking a sweat? That's extremely silly. You might as well stop playing RPGs and instead devote your time to Prototype. I have it for the Xbox360 - it's an awesome game.

Laying that to rest, I think you should rethink your justification.
"Unspectacular" hero is not OK because the enemy is sending darkspawn at you in waves varying from 5 to 10?
"Spectacular" hero is OK because the enemy is sending 100 darkspawn at a time?

You realise that you won't be fighting 100 monters at a time in DA2, right, and that you will not be able to kill all monters with ease, using only the main character?
You are not getting an overpowered main character - you are getting a main character who is as relatively weak as he was in Origins, he just fights using different animations.

I am just saying that the protagonist is supposed to be superiour. So whatever jumping and whirling around they are doing isn't more far off than him or her just being as 'good' as their strongest enemy. I don't know a historical person with achievements like the Warden who would not lead an army. They don't take 3 of their comrades and kill their enemy in small groups. That's not realistic anywhere outside of video games.

I don't want to fight groups of 100s, I am fine the way it was in DA:O. I was exaggerating to make a point in how 'over the top' this 'over the top' discussion is. I mean, the game mechanics as such are unrealistic already. Why do people complain about unrealistic combat moves? it is really always the same discussion about realism we have here and it is always the same answer: Realism isn't the most important feature of the game. Eye candy will always go over realism. Because the game doesn't aim at people who exactly know how all this should work in real life, it aims at people who go like 'wow that was cool' when 'something awesome' happens. As for example an unrealistic combat move.

[Xewaka]

AlexXIV wrote...
*sinp*Eye candy will always go over realism. *Snip*

This is the problem. People assume they're mutually exclusive. They're not. In fact, eye candy is more pleasing when you don't have to squint and tilt your head to watch at it.

Modifié par Xewaka, 16 janvier 2011 - 01:30 .

[AlexXIV]

Xewaka wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
*sinp*Eye candy will always go over realism. *Snip*

This is the problem. People assume they're mutually exclusive. They're not. In fact, eye candy is more pleasing when you don't have to squint and tilt your head to watch at it.

Well I agree on that. I could also do with less lightnings and color accompanying every swing, but I guess it's in to distract from some animations shortcomings.

[Merced652]

Mature and fundamentally realistic is roughly equivalent to A Song of Fire and Ice. It was a fantasy series, there was magic, dragons, and all that cool stuff. It was also substantially more mature(often as a consequence of also being more realistic) than almost every other series of books of the same type. DA2 is like george r r martin with out the realism. Which is to say if his typical writing style wasn't overly graphic enough, it'd be pointlessly graphic if it wasn't even realistic.

But yes, i like my porridge a particular way. Hopefully those that don't like it within degrees of that choke on theirs.

Modifié par Merced652, 16 janvier 2011 - 02:05 .

[Valmarn]

Brockololly wrote...

I've come to view Dragon Age 2 as the kid thats a straight up book worm dork in high school. He knows he's a nerd and come time to go to college, he thinks he'll reinvent himself. But he's trying way too hard to fit in with the first bumping frat Bros and in the process, ends up looking like a total fool.

So yeah, I totally agree with you Lusitanum. Its one thing to try and make the animations more interesting, but its another when they just end up looking so over the top and ridiculous that they're flat out distracting and neurotic looking.

I second that. It seems that each subsequent gameplay video that I watch makes me more thankful that I canceled my pre-order.

[Valmarn]

Merced652 wrote...

Mature and fundamentally realistic is roughly equivalent to A Song of Fire and Ice. It was a fantasy series, there was magic, dragons, and all that cool stuff. It was also substantially more mature(often as a consequence of also being more realistic) than almost every other series of books of the same type. DA2 is like george r r martin with out the realism. Which is to say if his typical writing style wasn't overly graphic enough, it'd be pointlessly graphic if it wasn't even realistic.

But yes, i like my porridge a particular way. Hopefully those that don't like it within degrees of that choke on theirs.

So, what you're saying is your opinion and personal tastes are your own, and damn anyone whose opinion and personal tastes are not similar to yours.

Isn't that charming...

I wish I could say the feeling is mutual, but I don't wish anyone ill simply because they don't think like me.

[ErichHartmann]

I like the new combat animations. But then I am very flexible with adjusting to different RPG designs. /shrugs