255 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Captain Sassy Pants wrote...
And DA2 won't be better. Why? Because they aren't even in the same genre anymore. Baldur's Gate is a tactical RPG, DA2 is an action RPG.

Watching all of the game play videos, it looks to me like it has more in common with Diablo 2 than Baldur's Gate.

So slow = tactical?

[JrayM16]

A few points:



First, the quality of games is all subjective anyway so there is no definte measure of whether or not DA2 was better than BG 2 except in each individual;s own eyes. It's a personal thing. Clearly, Mike feels that DA2 is often on par with BG2. This is correct because it is his opinion. Others may disagree. They are also correct(except when they haven't played the game yet.)



Second, I feel that BG 2 wasn't even the end-all-be-all of CRPGs in the first place. I feel that it didn't even meet the standard set by Planescape: Torment, a year before. And that it has been surpassed multiple times since. I feel that Deus Ex was much more innovative, despite being a different sort of CRPG. KOTOR was very close. The Witcher accomplished a lot of what BG 2 and other Bioware games tried to do and stilll haven't done in some cases. And DA:O was the modern realization of BG 2 and was better for it.



Though again, all I have just said was my opinion, I would never claim it as fact, as all this s subjective.



Finally, it's just plain dumb to assume that nothing can surpass a classic. No matter how good any work of art has ever been, it has almost always been surpassed later, whether by the same artist or someone else.



Look at the early films like GOne with the Wind or Citizen Kane. These were the movies that defined a medium. But later, they are surpassed with work such as Lawrence of Arabia, The Godfather, etc. Or books. People thought no one could ever match Faulkner in his arena of style, but along comes Cormac McCarthy and in my eyes beats Faulkner hands down.



Nothing stays on top forever, DA2 may not necessarily be the game to top BG 2, but it might. And one day something will.

[Master Shiori]

kungflu wrote...

popularity =/ quality

Quality = entirely subjective

Back when it was released I would consider BG2 to be both a quality game and a popular one. Nowadays, it's quility in face of modern rpgs could be called in question.
It's story and characters are still great, but gameplay, for me, isn't as good as that of DA:O or DA2 (based on what I've seen in vids).

Therefore I could make a statement that, in my opinion, the quality of DA2 is better than that of BG2 and, for me, it would be true. 

[AlanC9]

Captain Sassy Pants wrote...

But yeah, replaying BG2 this summer made me realize just how overrated that game is.

Yup. Lots of people like it = overrated.

EVERYTHING is overrated in someone's eyes. Get over yourself.

Sure, if you get over BG2.

[contextual_entity]

JohnEpler wrote...

I might recommend actually reading the article before you jump to conclusions.

Oh, who am I kidding. People are going to jump to conclusions regardless of what I say.

No seriously for DA3, bring in Obsidian. Or just Mr. Avellone. Either works. Even as "creative consultants." The ideas those guys have are brilliant, but their execution leaves something to be desired whereas Bioware's is almost flawless. I'm still convinced this is why BG2 is one of the greatest games of all time (in my opinion, at least).

[SkyWard20]

Master Shiori wrote...

kungflu wrote...

popularity =/ quality

Quality = entirely subjective

Back when it was released I would consider BG2 to be both a quality game and a popular one. Nowadays, it's quility in face of modern rpgs could be called in question.
It's story and characters are still great, but gameplay, for me, isn't as good as that of DA:O or DA2 (based on what I've seen in vids).

Therefore I could make a statement that, in my opinion, the quality of DA2 is better than that of BG2 and, for me, it would be true. 

I feel the same but, apparently, it's not something you just go around and say on gaming forums unless you want to start a flame war. Baldur's Gate could be spectacular from a roleplaying/storytelling PoV, but from playing the little that I have, I much prefer more recent games from a mechanical standpoint... not necessarily BW games, just big releases in general.

The problem I faced when playing Baldur's Gate 2 was that I was very much faced with the same type of combat ( the first area was almost only just combat ) when the game doesn't do that very good by modern standarts.

The game might be VERY enjoyable to me if I get past that, I don't know.

[Altima Darkspells]

You have to remember that this is the same company who said they'd support Origins with two years of DLC.  How'd that work out?

Can't really believe certain things they say.  This?  This is just marketing BS.

Amitar wrote...


...whereas Bioware's is almost flawless...

Except the memory leaks and broken patches in a game delayed almost six months for 'bug testing'.  Clearly, the QA department never played Origins for more than half an hour at a time.

[Khayness]

JrayM16 wrote...

Finally, it's just plain dumb to assume that nothing can surpass a classic. No matter how good any work of art has ever been, it has almost always been surpassed later, whether by the same artist or someone else.

But it's like comparing a Salvador Dali painting to a Wagner opera. You can't.

DA2 and BG has the same developer, both are fantasy, and that's about it. Made under different expectations and limitations, the gaming industry has changed.

That statement is just another marketing line which is far from reality, and even Laidlaw knows that. Just like the whole spiritual succesor thing.

DA:O felt like an advanced NWN2 (I know it's not a BioWare game) to me anyways.

[Mad-Max90]

I love how you all cast judgement on DA2 due to your obsession with a game too complex for the average gamer, and while it was great at it's time it has become obsolete and now it's time to move on, but you won't because you do so enjoy antagonizing anything bioware does that isn't baulder's gate

[Junri]

Writing can always improve. BG2 was limited by the D&D universe, we'll see how DA2's story and writing turns out. I have a good feeling I'll be satisfied.

BTW, BG2's gameplay will not stand up to today's standards. Its too slow and it follows dated mechanics. You guys may enjoy it due to the nostalgia it brings, but honestly compared to many games out there nowadays, it just won't compete and sell.

Modifié par Junri, 09 février 2011 - 07:58 .

[JrayM16]

Khayness wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

Finally, it's just plain dumb to assume that nothing can surpass a classic. No matter how good any work of art has ever been, it has almost always been surpassed later, whether by the same artist or someone else.

But it's like comparing a Salvador Dali painting to a Wagner opera. You can't.

DA2 and BG has the same developer, both are fantasy, and that's about it. Made under different expectations and limitations, the gaming industry has changed.

That statement is just another marketing line which is far from reality, and even Laidlaw knows that. Just like the whole spiritual succesor thing.

DA:O felt like an advanced NWN2 (I know it's not a BioWare game) to me anyways.

But if we constrict ourselves completely, then nothing is anything anymore. 

Let's be honest, there's never ever going to be another RPG that's directly comparable to BG 2 by your standards of what the genre is.  DA2 and BG2 are both tactical RPGs.  They have many differences, but it would be like comparing two different abstract paintings.  TOns of differences, same core.  Besides, how can we ever judge new types of art without looking to old ones?  DA2 descends from DA2, so I think the comparison is valid.

And again, it's subjective.  I might enjoy DA2 more than BG2.  Is that going to be the same for a lot of people?  Based on waht I'm reading in this thread, no.  But for me, it could be true.  Or for Mike Laidlaw.  Was it the ebst idea for Mike to make that statement?  Probably not, since it will just get the purists angry.  But for him it might be true. 

[Bryy_Miller]

Khayness wrote...

It's the scale what makes BG truly amazing, and everyone knows that nobody in their right mindset would try to make a game that huge with current day expectations.

Weeks of gameplay with 3d graphics, voice acting and cutscenes, good luck with that.

Comparing DA2 to BG serves no purpose other than pissing people off.

Even if it IS as good as BG2, by merely saying this, BioWare has doomed it to be less than Baldur's Gate 2.

[Altima Darkspells]

Mad-Max90 wrote...

I love how you all cast judgement on DA2 due to your obsession with a game too complex for the average gamer, and while it was great at it's time it has become obsolete and now it's time to move on, but you won't because you do so enjoy antagonizing anything bioware does that isn't baulder's gate

See, people assuming that the 'average' gamer can't understand or play games like BG2 is the reason why we get really stupid decisions on the part of developers and publishers.

'Oh, we can't show the female character.  The customers might get confused!'

JrayM16 wrote...

Let's be honest, there's never ever going to be another RPG that's directly comparable to BG 2... 

People used to think the same of Planescape.  Then Mask of the Betrayer came out...

Modifié par Altima Darkspells, 09 février 2011 - 07:58 .

[JrayM16]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Khayness wrote...

It's the scale what makes BG truly amazing, and everyone knows that nobody in their right mindset would try to make a game that huge with current day expectations.

Weeks of gameplay with 3d graphics, voice acting and cutscenes, good luck with that.

Comparing DA2 to BG serves no purpose other than pissing people off.

Even if it IS as good as BG2, by merely saying this, BioWare has doomed it to be less than Baldur's Gate 2.

Sad, but true.

[Khayness]

Mad-Max90 wrote...

I love how you all cast judgement on DA2 due to your obsession with a game too complex for the average gamer, and while it was great at it's time it has become obsolete and now it's time to move on, but you won't because you do so enjoy antagonizing anything bioware does that isn't baulder's gate

You are cute trying to convince people who don't want to be convinced. Especially with funny generalities as arguments.

Save yourself the hassle and don't post the same thing over and over again.

[Mad-Max90]

The purists, Mike is as pure as one can get yet no one believes him because there all blind with rage that a guy who helped make a game could say it's comparable to an older game they made. Really guys really this is what it boils down to, you closing your eyed and plugging your ears while saying nothing can even compare to bg2. Get over yourselves for everybody's sake

[Fadook]

Bah, Planescape: Torment had a far better plot and characters than DA:O and BG2 combined.

[JrayM16]

Fadook wrote...

Bah, Planescape: Torment had a far better plot and characters than DA:O and BG2 combined.

I can get behind that.

[Saibh]

You guys make me want to go on a lynching of BGII. Can you not just take off your rose-colored glasses and objective view BGII for what it is? Amazing--for the time. But old, and limited by the budget, engine, and technology of the time.

DAO improved upon nearly every aspect of that game. DAII looks even better, if you ask me. So, yeah, it could easily be a better game. But the holy platform that you have placed that game on refuses to allow you to doubt anything about it.

Technically this thread already exist, and I'll say what I said there: "If I watched a series as campy as Xena today, I'd laugh at it. I'd laugh and laugh and laugh. It'd be way over the top. Yet, when I watch Xena, that's not really what I think. Because my nostalgia kicks in, I don't see it like that."

Someone used the "I played it recently!" argument, but they missed that point--that my nostalgia will always color my perception of that series. I could view it objectively, if I wanted, but I enjoyed it so much, why would I want to knock it down a peg? Nostalgia can be very good thing. It allows for me to enjoy dated things with the same wonder I did ten years ago.

But it also should never cloud my vision about what is happening now. And, right now, I can easily see DAII surpasses BGII in many aspects.

Modifié par Saibh, 09 février 2011 - 08:05 .

[Atakuma]

I didn't like even like BG2 so this statement really doesn't mean anything to me. It just seems like pandering.

[contextual_entity]

Altima Darkspells wrote...

You have to remember that this is the same company who said they'd support Origins with two years of DLC.  How'd that work out?

Can't really believe certain things they say.  This?  This is just marketing BS.

Amitar wrote...


...whereas Bioware's is almost flawless...

Except the memory leaks and broken patches in a game delayed almost six months for 'bug testing'.  Clearly, the QA department never played Origins for more than half an hour at a time.

I never experienced those issues personally. The only game I had issue with was ME1 and that was a port by another company.

[Mad-Max90]

I only said it was too complex for the average gamer is because it's kind of true, you give that game to an average gamer today and they will load it up and be like WTF? That's where dragon age improved itself, they covered a lager market by having a great game that was less complex.

Complexity does not equal great

[DPB]

Saibh wrote...
snip

I agree, at least to a certain extent. BG2 is one of my favourite games, but it does bother me that it's held up as some sort of untouchable sacred cow, and that any comparison against it gets seems to get taken as a personal slight by many of its fans.

[koshiee]

<_< okay whatever you say Bioware.........
let's revist this thread in 1 month.  

[JrayM16]

Who knows, ten years from now we might be having the same discussion, except over DA:O or DA2. You never know how the future will look back...