1044 réponses à ce sujet

[DaggerFiend]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

It demonstrates that they didn't need to be forced in order to follow the default path.

Now, if they want to be forced, that's a different question.  I have no data for that.

You know, Sylvius, I said this before (I think you may have overlooked it), they're trying to enhance the experience for story-receptive players. If this does or doesn't enhance the experience is arguable, but that's the reason they're doing it. It's less wanting to be forced and more wanting a better story, and if this does result in a better story, they (and by they, I mean we) will be for it.

[Night Prowler76]

Its not OUR game, its BioWare's game, and they will have plenty of copies of it to keep for themselves because a huge chunk of their DAO fans will pass on this game, the notion that you can release a game that is shorter in length, with less custimization, less dialogue choice than the original and has had a development length of about 1/3 DAO is somehow worth full price is just insane, I really hope this game goes down as a huge failure, DAO was a good game, but DA2 will go down as one of the stupidest decisions in game development in recent years.

Modifié par Night Prowler76, 21 janvier 2011 - 02:31 .

[JrayM16]

It's no one 's game in the sense this thread was created in. This whole thread was based on a creative play on semantics, something I typically don't expect from Sylivius as he has stated that manipulation of language isn't his strong suit. Unless it's based on a genuine misinerpreatation of sematics, which seems more likely.



Essentially, this whole thread is based on a verbal logical fallacy, which I will not stand for.

[sevalaricgirl]

tmp7704 wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

Huh? So, you assume she can't use bow's because someone said she can't? I don't think the devs said that she literally can not use bows... only that she is "not a bow girl". I took that as meaning she would only use a bow if she didn't have a choice.

Characters in DA2 can only equip weapons for which they have proficiency (skill tree)
Companions in DA2 only get single weapon skill tree, the other is replaced with their unique skill tree.
Isabela's weapon skill tree is dual "daggers".
As such, she cannot equip the bow.

I didn't like that in DAO meaning when I tried to equip Lelianna with a bow so we had 2 archers, my warden and Lelianna, she always used the daggers.  I gave her archery skills too.  Maybe I needed to unequip the daggers but I thought she'd go in fighting with her fists, lol. 

[Blastback]

sevalaricgirl wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

Huh? So, you assume she can't use bow's because someone said she can't? I don't think the devs said that she literally can not use bows... only that she is "not a bow girl". I took that as meaning she would only use a bow if she didn't have a choice.

Characters in DA2 can only equip weapons for which they have proficiency (skill tree)
Companions in DA2 only get single weapon skill tree, the other is replaced with their unique skill tree.
Isabela's weapon skill tree is dual "daggers".
As such, she cannot equip the bow.

I didn't like that in DAO meaning when I tried to equip Lelianna with a bow so we had 2 archers, my warden and Lelianna, she always used the daggers.  I gave her archery skills too.  Maybe I needed to unequip the daggers but I thought she'd go in fighting with her fists, lol. 

way to avoid that is to switch over to ranged at the tactics menu

[Malanek]

sevalaricgirl wrote...
I didn't like that in DAO meaning when I tried to equip Lelianna with a bow so we had 2 archers, my warden and Lelianna, she always used the daggers.  I gave her archery skills too.  Maybe I needed to unequip the daggers but I thought she'd go in fighting with her fists, lol. 

I think you are thinking of a tactic where when enemies get close she would automatically equip a close weapon if she has one rather than stick with the bow. To get around that you can change her tactics to, I think, ranged. Or make both her weapons bows.

[Sylvius the Mad]

moilami wrote...

...

Your entire point regarding prediction relies heavily upon inference, and inference produces errors.  Abductive reasoning produces errors.

And really, why would I care if my character were predictable.  If what you say is true, that every rational person is predictable.  I would happily accept predictability in exchange for rationality.

No, people are geniuses to predict things. Especially behaviour of other people. And especially if they can observe you and you share same nationality.

And the people are relevantly similar in other ways.  You cannot, I suspect, accurately predict the behaviour of autistic people or psychopaths without first knowing that they are autistic or psychopathic, and you wouldn't have that information.

People are different.  This is why empathy doesn't work.

I don't understand what you mean but guess what? You contradicted yourself. If you say an enormous database would be needed to be somewhat predictable (not totally predictable nor unpredictable, just enough to be "predictable enough for RP"), you would not be able to define your characters in a way you would know always anything they do.

This is clearly untrue, as even a cursory examination of cryptography would demonstrate.

It is far easier to encrypt a message when in possession of the cipher than to decrypt a message when not in possesstion of the cipher.

And it is true. The only person you really can RP is you, and even then you would have to try to predict what you would do because even you can't totally predict what you would do in real.

Of course I can.  It's the same process I would use to make the decisions when they actually arise.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Your entire point regarding prediction relies heavily upon inference, and inference produces errors.  Abductive reasoning produces errors.

And really, why would I care if my character were predictable.  If what you say is true, that every rational person is predictable.  I would happily accept predictability in exchange for rationality.

Rational people are predictable. But people are not rational.

Since people cannot be modeled as perfect rule following entities, the sort of predictive behaviour you want is impossible.

Error reduction is actually an irrational way of approaching prediction anyway, because it prices costs incorrectly.

And the people are relevantly similar in other ways.  You cannot, I suspect, accurately predict the behaviour of autistic people or psychopaths without first knowing that they are autistic or psychopathic, and you wouldn't have that information.

But this is no different than arguing that you cannot predict the behaviour of a person (even if we could predict the behaviour of people perfectly) without knowing they are in fact people and not protons.

That there is a baseline need for category membership before prediction doesn't mean prediction doesn't work.

People are different.  This is why empathy doesn't work.

Except, of course, for the fact that empathy works. But this goes back to defining things in rigorious and useless ways. Like error reduction being a valued thing.

[David Gaider]

Night Prowler76 wrote...
I really hope this game goes down as a huge failure.

Huh.

Not wanting to buy a game because it's not for you is one thing, but wishing failure on us (as some kind of lesson, I suppose?) seems a little... petty.

Just had to throw that out there, amidst all the customary pedantism. Carry on.

[Dubya75]

David Gaider wrote...

Night Prowler76 wrote...
I really hope this game goes down as a huge failure.

Huh.

Not wanting to buy a game because it's not for you is one thing, but wishing failure on us (as some kind of lesson, I suppose?) seems a little... petty.

Just had to throw that out there, amidst all the customary pedantism. Carry on.

NightProwler76 should be banned for this!

Modifié par Dubya75, 21 janvier 2011 - 04:02 .

[Dubya75]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

Its not OUR game, its BioWare's game, and they will have plenty of copies of it to keep for themselves because a huge chunk of their DAO fans will pass on this game, the notion that you can release a game that is shorter in length, with less custimization, less dialogue choice than the original and has had a development length of about 1/3 DAO is somehow worth full price is just insane, I really hope this game goes down as a huge failure, DAO was a good game, but DA2 will go down as one of the stupidest decisions in game development in recent years.

You are such an idiot.

[Nic-V]

People are entitled to their opinions but I still think we should play the game and discuss how much it sucks (which it probably won't) later, yes?

[Beerfish]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

Its not OUR game, its BioWare's game, and they will have plenty of copies of it to keep for themselves because a huge chunk of their DAO fans will pass on this game, the notion that you can release a game that is shorter in length, with less custimization, less dialogue choice than the original and has had a development length of about 1/3 DAO is somehow worth full price is just insane, I really hope this game goes down as a huge failure, DAO was a good game, but DA2 will go down as one of the stupidest decisions in game development in recent years.

But you will buy it, as will 95% of the people that complain about it before release.  The only way to credibly bash a game after it is out is to buy it, play it and then point to all the things that one had already decided they did not like about it.

[LdyShayna]

David Gaider wrote...

Night Prowler76 wrote...
I really hope this game goes down as a huge failure.

Huh.

Not wanting to buy a game because it's not for you is one thing, but wishing failure on us (as some kind of lesson, I suppose?) seems a little... petty.

I have to agree. 

I have, in the past, made my case for what kind of game I want.  Sometimes I like to think I influence things in my direction.  Sometimes, I need to accept being disappointed.  I don't have the money to by a couple hundred thousand copies to make my opinion weigh more, sadly.  I never hope they fail horribly, though.  Then I will NEVER be able to persuade them to make more of what I want.

Err...I mean.  I never do that because it would be mean.  Not anything to do with my selfishness.  Honest.

Oh, David.  Can we arrange a timeshare ownership plan of the game, by the way? 

Modifié par LdyShayna, 21 janvier 2011 - 04:09 .

[Master Shiori]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

Its not OUR game, its BioWare's game, and they will have plenty of copies of it to keep for themselves because a huge chunk of their DAO fans will pass on this game, the notion that you can release a game that is shorter in length, with less custimization, less dialogue choice than the original and has had a development length of about 1/3 DAO is somehow worth full price is just insane, I really hope this game goes down as a huge failure, DAO was a good game, but DA2 will go down as one of the stupidest decisions in game development in recent years.

If you don't like the chnages they implemented in DA2, don't buy the game. Simple.

Wishing failure to the devs before the game is even out is as petty as it gets. At least play the game before bashing it and see if your arguments ring true. Otherwise nothing you say will carry any weight.

[Few87]

It isnt really petty to hope this game goes down as a failure. It would be good for the industry for it to be shown that not all games need to be super casual action extreme. I mean why change Dragon Age into Mass Effect? (Which as we all know is what has happend) Purely because they think this will sell better as more casual action players will like it. They will go on about oh no this is the direction we wanted. NONSENSE you just want quick easy money. You are sell outs in the strongest sense of the word. If this game tanks then maybe they will realise that not everyone wants mass effect in a different guise. Youve already got that game and Dragon Age was a different type that a different kind of player enjoyed. But if this tanks then it probably wont help, they will just change dragon age to an iPhone only game because hey thats casual action super cool isnt it!?

[Herr Uhl]

Dubya75 wrote...

NightProwler76 should be banned for this!

Nah.

[Noob451]

SultryVulcan wrote...

Are you being sarcastic?
It is our game....within the parameters that Bioware constructed.

this

[Dhiro]

Few87 wrote...

It isnt really petty to hope this game goes down as a failure. It would be good for the industry for it to be shown that not all games need to be super casual action extreme. I mean why change Dragon Age into Mass Effect? (Which as we all know is what has happend) Purely because they think this will sell better as more casual action players will like it. They will go on about oh no this is the direction we wanted. NONSENSE you just want quick easy money. You are sell outs in the strongest sense of the word. If this game tanks then maybe they will realise that not everyone wants mass effect in a different guise. Youve already got that game and Dragon Age was a different type that a different kind of player enjoyed. But if this tanks then it probably wont help, they will just change dragon age to an iPhone only game because hey thats casual action super cool isnt it!?

We don't know nothing. Maybe you know, we don't. Please, don't speak as if you're a representant of all the BSN will.

[Saibh]

Few87 wrote...

It isnt really petty to hope this game goes down as a failure. It would be good for the industry for it to be shown that not all games need to be super casual action extreme. I mean why change Dragon Age into Mass Effect? (Which as we all know is what has happend) Purely because they think this will sell better as more casual action players will like it. They will go on about oh no this is the direction we wanted. NONSENSE you just want quick easy money. You are sell outs in the strongest sense of the word. If this game tanks then maybe they will realise that not everyone wants mass effect in a different guise. Youve already got that game and Dragon Age was a different type that a different kind of player enjoyed. But if this tanks then it probably wont help, they will just change dragon age to an iPhone only game because hey thats casual action super cool isnt it!?

It is absolutely petty. Only the most immature and childish of people hopes that a major game release will go down as a failure because they don't like the genre or the changes.

Nothing I've seen indicates that Dragon Age is now Mass Effect with swords. There are similarities and influences, but there are also marked differences. Unlike what these forums think, ME2 was a huge success, and praised universally elsewhere. They're not out of their minds to think that a marriage between these two franchises will meet with success.

So, yes, only petty little brats think that BioWare somehow sold out on them. If you don't like the game, don't buy it. Just because they choose not to make the same game over and over doesn't mean they're betraying you because they don't owe you anything.

But, hey. Why think about the changes and the similarities when you can just stomp your feet and scream?

[Beerfish]

Few87 wrote...

It isnt really petty to hope this game goes down as a failure. It would be good for the industry for it to be shown that not all games need to be super casual action extreme. I mean why change Dragon Age into Mass Effect? (Which as we all know is what has happend) Purely because they think this will sell better as more casual action players will like it. They will go on about oh no this is the direction we wanted. NONSENSE you just want quick easy money. You are sell outs in the strongest sense of the word. If this game tanks then maybe they will realise that not everyone wants mass effect in a different guise. Youve already got that game and Dragon Age was a different type that a different kind of player enjoyed. But if this tanks then it probably wont help, they will just change dragon age to an iPhone only game because hey thats casual action super cool isnt it!?

Dumb post.  You also will buy the game for the same reasons I listed in my previous post.

[Few87]

No Im not going to buy it actually, I hope you all have fun playing dragon effect 2.

[In Exile]

Saibh wrote...
Nothing I've seen indicates that Dragon Age is now Mass Effect with swords. There are similarities and influences, but there are also marked differences. Unlike what these forums think, ME2 was a huge success, and praised universally elsewhere. They're not out of their minds to think that a marriage between these two franchises will meet with success.

The thing is, Mass Effect became synonymous with the voiced PC in RPGs, and this is what gets 99% of the DA2 is now ME line. Without that one major shift, you'd find little-to-no it's Dragon Effect! quotes.

'Cause, really, beside VO, what major changes has DA2 made? Fixed race? Other rpgs had that. Fixed background? Most if not all RPGs had that.

[In Exile]

Few87 wrote...

No Im not going to buy it actually, I hope you all have fun playing dragon effect 2.

Like you did playing Mass Effect 2?

[Dhiro]

Few87 wrote...

No Im not going to buy it actually, I hope you all have fun playing dragon effect 2.

Thank you, I hope I wil, too :<