464 réponses à ce sujet

[nelly21]

I honestly don't understand this notion that "combat has changed". All they did was shorten cool downs and expand on combat animations. Other than that, I can't see any difference in combat. The strategic "rts" tactics remain unchanged, as do the individual class mechanics.

Certain restrictions, like party equipment, I understand the frustration with. I believe they are doing it to keep characters "in character". For example, I loved the Legion of the Dead armor in DAO, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense that Sten was wearing it since the armor is only given to members of the Legion. While I am not entirely sold on not allowing modification of party armor, I'm willing to give it a try.

I do, however, find it absurd that people are declaring the game a sin and Bioware traitors to the so-called "spirit of Baldur's Gate" TWO MONTHS before they've even played the game. It's paranoia. Unfounded paranoia. If you applied such a manner of thinking to any aspect of real life, aluminum foil hats would be a permanent wardrobe accessory. Thankfully, games are not important in life.

As for me, I believe I am going to love DA 2 and will reserve any judgement until I've actually played it.

Modifié par nelly21, 20 janvier 2011 - 09:02 .

[Weevilbits]

SandyWB wrote...

Some enjoy playing their games like a chess game, other's like a faster approach to battle.

I agree with pretty much everything you say in this paragraph, but I've seen this metaphor before a number of times on this board.  Combat in Origins, or Baldurs Gate, or whatever "classic" Bioware game you care to mention in no way whatsoever resembles a chess match.  Unless it's some weird alien kind of chess I've never seen where all the pieces are moving around on the board at once and will go off and do there own thing unless you specifically tell them not to.  Mainstream rpgs as a genre gave up (or should have given up) any pretensions of resembling chess when they abandoned turn-based combat.  And even before then, I don't think anyone really believes that, had he been born a couple decades later, Garry Kasporov could just as easily have dedicated his intellect to mastering the combat engine from the original Fallout.

All the hullabaloo about this or that type of RPG combat being "dumbed down" generally fails to take into account that all of this, fun as it might be, was never very bright to begin with.  From the initial Baldurs Gate on, each new iteration of "squad-based tactical combat" they've presented  generally renders the game (for me at least) about as mentally taxing as the previous.  The value-add is that each evolution has been consistently less prone to tedium then the last.

The whole 'only one race' and 'voiced main character' feels like it has been covered time and time again, so I'll just leave it at this.

This is more directed at other comments in the thread, but I'll springboard off here so I can avoid creating an additional post:

There seem to be a lot of people here who draw a closed box around the Origins characterization (3 races, 3 classes, a handful of origins choices, the ability to select a handful of prewritten dilogue options and imagine them in your head in whatever voice you want) and declare there they are free to make the character their own, but feel like the few additional constraints DA2 puts on ruins that.  The truth is you were never able to make the character your own.  In Origins you couldn't be a Qunari, or a human commoner, or a human noble who's also an only child, or an elf commoner who is a confirmed bachelor.  You couldn't play a character who responds to the Blight by telling Alistair it's his problem and moving to Antiva.  In the face of that, the fact that you could imagine in your head that he sounds like Mike Tyson when he speaks strikes me as a somewhat arbitrary place to draw your line in the sand.

[Rylor Tormtor]

nelly21 wrote...

I honestly don't understand this notion that "combat has changed". All they did was shorten cool downs and expand on combat animations. Other than that, I can't see any difference in combat. The strategic "rts" tactics remain unchanged, as do the individual class mechanics.

Certain restrictions, like party equipment, I understand the frustration with. I believe they are doing it to keep characters "in character". For example, I loved the Legion of the Dead armor in DAO, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense that Sten was wearing it since the armor is only given to members of the Legion. While I am not entirely sold on not allowing modification of party armor, I'm willing to give it a try.

I do, however, find it absurd that people are declaring the game a sin and Bioware traitors to the so-called "spirit of Baldur's Gate" TWO MONTHS before they've even played the game. It's paranoia. Unfounded paranoia. If you applied such a manner of thinking to any aspect of real life, aluminum foil hats would be a permanent wardrobe accessory. Thankfully, games are not important in life.

As for me, I believe I am going to love DA 2 and will reserve any judgement until I've actually played it.

I wouldn't say that the more cool-headed are calling it a sin. As for paranoia, well, a number of posters in this thread have listed the confirmed features that they feel are moving away from their vision of what the Dragon Age franchise should be. Notice the use of pronouns, it is their opinion, just like it is your opinion that you will enjoy it, even though you have no more grounds for that than they do for saying they are not going.

Oh, as for your comment in how we act in "real life". I assume you haven't checked any news outlet or followed any sort of public dialogue in any country (except Canada, since they seem, as usual, relatively level headed about things). Socialized health care in America is going to kill your grandmother, the government in the UK is shutting down all the universities, and immigrants are ruining everything in France, apparently.* These are all hyper paranoid delusions, so be careful on which comparisons you use.


*N.B. These are all just examples from fringe, absolutely nutso people (except the UK one  ) and I no way endorse or agree with them, but I am using them as examples of the type of behaviour the quoted poster only attributed to gaming and online communities.

Oh, as an addendum: 

Unless it's some weird alien kind of chess I've never seen where all the
pieces are moving around on the board at once and will go off and do
there own thing unless you specifically tell them not to.

I want that chess game.

Modifié par Rylor Tormtor, 20 janvier 2011 - 09:11 .

[Altered Idol]

I for one cannot wait to get my hands DA2!!



I loved Origins but there were flaws. The game didn't need a complete overhaul but it did require improvements, which is something you expect from most sequels. Without having played it, I cannot say for sure whether its an improvement or not but from what I've read/see/heard it certainly seems to be heading in the right direction.



It will be interesting to see how the interactive framed narrative works. I've got high hopes but I won't be jumping to any conclusions until I play it for myself.

[AlanC9]

Nissa_Red wrote...

Well, don't you put more salt on the wound now

I personally didn't have to suffer much from those. The ME2' ones, however :

- airlift bug
- getting stuck in the geometry
- cover stand up bug
- broken geometry/textures
- invisible enemies

and I could go on...

Hmmm.. I haven't been hit by any of those except an occasional inability to vault an object, and geometry faults that only match ME1's -- though ME1 had an additional problem with enemies hit by biotics getting caught behind the geometry and becoming invulnerable. On ME1 I get crashing and consistently bad, glitchy sound anyplace with ambient noise.

I'll call it a tie. 

[Red by Full Metal Jacket]

Doubts, guys if there is one company out there we can trust its
Bioware, just look at there track record and tell me if your still
worried, and if thats not good enough for you look at Hawke's beard

Yes, because Sonic: the Dark Chronicles just SCREAMS good quality, right?  No developer is immune to bad games.

I think the visuals relly don't help the game IMO.  That's my main problem. From what little preview I have, I'm pretty unimpressed.  The colors look washed out (too many browns and reds) and the characters look really lifeless (thousand yard stares galore).

I honesly wish they would be more adventurous with options.  It just looks like a faster-paced version of the same game. How about some new weapon types? Spears? Flails? Halberds? Throwing Knives? I'd like to see greater variety in location  How about a desert or snowy town?  Say what you want about games like Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, but they almost always have a wide variety of places to explore.

Modifié par Red by Full Metal Jacket, 20 janvier 2011 - 09:14 .

[Nissa_Red]

AlanC9 wrote...
Hmmm.. I haven't been hit by any of those except an occasional inability to vault an object, and geometry faults that only match ME1's -- though ME1 had an additional problem with enemies hit by biotics getting caught behind the geometry and becoming invulnerable. On ME1 I get crashing and consistently bad, glitchy sound anyplace with ambient noise.

I'll call it a tie. 

Fair enough. I can acknowledge worthy contestants to my reign over this thread.
Doh, nevermind.

Seriously though, I can understand bugs happening. I wouldn't complain if these bugs happened at the release, or shortly after, or to only a handful of people with peculiar configurations. We're talking about games that have been out for years now, however, and bugs that happened all over the place/gamer community.

How Bioware could have released official content (that one has to pay for!) with such bugs really surprised me, to the point I wouldn't give it any serious consideration. That Bioware didn't care to fix them over time is simply beyond me, and precisely what I hold them grudge over today (among other few things), and for their coming games.

Modifié par Nissa_Red, 20 janvier 2011 - 09:29 .

[AlanC9]

You don't have to buy Sebastian, of course. I haven't.

And "ripped out "is nonsense -- I'd call it a lie but I figure you really believe this.

Modifié par AlanC9, 20 janvier 2011 - 09:35 .

[Morroian]

Deadmac wrote...

Voiced player characters take the role playing out of role playing games. Since the whole idea behind role playing is that 'you' are in control, hearing another person's voice in place of your inner voice separates 'you' from the game. As a result of being seperated from the character, you are no longer playing a specific role in the story. Since the voice you are hearing, due to your dialgue selection, is not your own, the character you are moving on the board is 'not you'.

If you are playing a character purposefully different from you then you are no longer you either.

[Il Divo]

Deadmac wrote...

Voiced player characters take the role playing out of role playing games. Since the whole idea behind role playing is that 'you' are in control, hearing another person's voice in place of your inner voice separates 'you' from the game. As a result of being seperated from the character, you are no longer playing a specific role in the story. Since the voice you are hearing, due to your dialgue selection, is not your own, the character you are moving on the board is 'not you'.

You are no longer role playing.

Added...
When you sit down to play a table-top rpg, the players are in complete control of their characters. If at any moment they are not in control, the game that is being played is no longer a role playing game.

Not true. Try asking your DM if he's comfortable with you attacking the rest of the party. 'Complete control' is an illusion, even in tabletop RPGs.

[thehistorysage]

errant_knight wrote...

thehistorysage wrote...

SandyWB wrote...

duckphone07 wrote...

I read it all.  I thought it was interesting.  A good post in my book.

Thank you.

Does it matter how long it took me? I did a whole lot of things in between writing, so I don't really know. Either way, isn't it better to write a lengthy post where you actually explain yourself, instead of just putting down a single paragraph where you state your opinion without any logical explanation whatsoever? In my experience, you usually get a better dialogue over the Internet if you explain your view in dept rather than spitting out short post. Quality over quantity, right?

I read it too, and you made some very, very good points. People continue to throw in outdated info like "They only have one outfit." When clearly in the videos and even from the lips of the devs themselves it has been put to rest. They all have more than one outfit/armour. If people were more inclined to read, instead of spout off about something they know next to nothing about then alot of the fear and hate would vanish.

Please don't up the ante by calling it 'fear and hate.' I don't fear or hate anything. I just don't like things. That level of angst is way over the top for all but a very few.

The one outfit thing does seem to be outdated, but the fact remains that we no longer have a full inventory to control, a part of gameplay I enjoyed, and can't use armor, clothing, etc. as part of our roleplay anymore. Also something I enjoyed.

I wasn't upping the ante at all. I'm not saying that everyone who dislikes the idea of the changes is fearful or hateful, but there is quite obviously plenty of fear and hate to be had. It's all over the forums.

[Morroian]

Inarborat wrote...

Calling people paranoid and conspiracy theorists is such a cheap insult.  For some of us, the game looks like crap and looks consolized.  It's not wowing me like previous Bioware titles always have.  I can't judge a game two months before it's out yet I'm forced to pre-order two months before the game comes out with very little information to make an informed decision?

You obviously don't like the direction of the game so your  decision would have been an informed one. The fact is you just don't want to make a decision.

Inarborat wrote...
Oh, I want to wait, read some more about the game and make sure about my decision but now I have to buy a character for $7 on top of a $10 pricehike?  It's ludicrious Bioware touts how important characters are for their games, rips them out and then has the gall to charge for them. 

They didn't rip him out. If you want to complain about people unnecessarily insulting those who don't like the games direction then don't make up criticisms.

Inarborat wrote...
It was a sad day when EA bought them out and we're now seeing the consequences.  It's more than just the gameplay and style changes.  The whole marketing and handling of the game has been off-putting to say the least.

Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me.

[Morroian]

Inarborat wrote...

Imagine playing BG without Minsc, KOTOR without HK-47, Mass Effect without Wrex, or Dragon Age without Shale?  Party characters are vital to a party based rpg.

I didn't realise Sebastian was the only party member.

[Il Divo]

Inarborat wrote...

I also don't have to buy the game.  I won't.   

Imagine playing BG without Minsc, KOTOR without HK-47, Mass Effect without Wrex, or Dragon Age without Shale?  Party characters are vital to a party based rpg.

Shale was dlc as well.

[Il Divo]

Inarborat wrote...

Il Divo wrote...
Shale was dlc as well.

Not if you bought it new.

Sebastian is free if you preordered the Signature Edition. And Shale, if I recall, was not free with every copy of DA:O.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 janvier 2011 - 09:42 .

[Meltemph]

Dragon Age without Shale?

Did exactly that quite a few times, worked out perfectly fine.

Not if you bought it new.

Huh? If you bought it new it was free DLC but it was still dlc...

[The Elder King]

Inarborat wrote...

Morroian wrote...

You obviously don't like the direction of the game so your  decision would have been an informed one. The fact is you just don't want to make a decision.

They didn't rip him out. If you want to complain about people unnecessarily insulting those who don't like the games direction then don't make up criticisms.

Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me.

I did make a decision.  I'm either not buying it or it'll be a heavily discounted Ultimate Edition sale next winter.

How else should I take it?  They announced the DLC 2 months before the game is out!

Now you're just being difficult.

In truth, they've announced che companion dlc 4 months ago, with the SE. The Black Emporium, that is in truth a dlc, will be available with every new games, so it's not a big thing. The other weapons are bonuses that come even with DAO I think.

[Morroian]

Inarborat wrote...

I did make a decision.  I'm either not buying it or it'll be a heavily discounted Ultimate Edition sale next winter.

So you don't like the direction of the game and didn't pre-order, sounds like an informed decision to me.

Inarborat wrote...

How else should I take it?  They announced the DLC 2 months before the game is out!

This has been answered by the devs. He was done with a separate DLC budget. If they weren't going to do DLC he wouldn't be in the game at all.

[Il Divo]

And the Steam users have my sympathies, but there are many limitations which come from using Steam. I still think this is overexaggerating the issue. Neither Shale nor Sebastian was given to every single player although they were completed at launch. They were treated as an added incentive. This doesn't change the fact that both characters are superfluous to the experience.

[The Elder King]

Inarborat wrote...

Il Divo wrote...
Shale was dlc as well.

Not if you bought it new.

Shale was a free dlc if you bough the game new. I'm sure about that because I've waited to have an internet connession available in the room where I play with xbox to use it.