385 réponses à ce sujet

[Noilly Prat]

Anathemic wrote...

Melduran wrote...

What are you talking about dude?  When was gaming acceptable for you when it envolved a pie chart eating stars while being chased by ghosts? Or maybe when the Italian guy jumped from the stack of  blocks to reach the flag?  If you have a problem with Bioware games then what are you playing thats RPG and satisfying? Eve? Since games became 3D its not possible to budget the same size and depth and expect it to be released within a set time frame.  Whatever you playing now must be incredible.

Game called The Witcher

Okay, I like The Witcher a lot, but I think it's hilarious that so many people hold this game up as a model for RPG depth and untainted-by-the-consoles PC purity.  The combat was shallow, almost mindless hack-and-slash, bordering on terrible.  Seriously, God of War has more sophisticated and strategic combat.

Also, The Witcher didn't provide much room for creating distinct character builds.  One version of Geralt would turn out about the same as another, regardless of how you spent your talent points.  Sure, you could choose to emphasize magic over sword techniques, or favor one technique over another, but it never seemed to make much difference in terms of how you play the game, at least to me.

And The Witcher isn't even very old, so it's hardly representative of any supposed "golden age" of computer RPGs, I'd think.

Don't get me wrong, I still think it's one of the better computer RPGs I've played in a while, but I absolutely don't think it's deeper than Dragon Age.

[Polemists05]

Yea I agree, Witcher was a decent game sure, but it was not a pinnacle of rpgs, even the Witcher team (Guys who made it) say looking back there are things from other rpgs (one developer sites mass effect) like more dialogue choices and different tone, that they wished they could have done.



Personally I loved almost all western rpgs from Arcanum to Vampire Bloodlines.spread the love people

[Pedrak]

Agree with the all the above. TW was good, maybe overall even on par with DAO (although I definitely liked the latter better, as I have a soft spot for party members and character customization) but the idea that it's the great golden shiny example of a perfect RPG, the last bastion of old-school tradition and quality, needs to die, and fast.

It was fine. And it was flawed. Just like DAO.

The funny thing is, with all this... rivalry? between the two fandoms, they do seem to have much in common. (and also people who are part of both - like me).

For example, if you visited TW forum after the release, guess what people talked around most?
B00bie cards, sex scenes and romances.

Fans. Fans never change.

Modifié par Pedrak, 20 février 2011 - 07:37 .

[Merced652]

Yrkoon wrote...

FellowerOfOdin wrote...
plus you can't really compare BG II to DA2 anyway as both games target a very different audience...

Do they?

This thread and most others should illustrate that yes, in fact they are targeted at very different audiences.

[Lennonkun]

Merced652 wrote...
This thread and most others should illustrate that yes, in fact they are targeted at very different audiences.

The reality however is that one audience is inherently superior to the other audience.

[Melduran]

Merced652 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

FellowerOfOdin wrote...
plus you can't really compare BG II to DA2 anyway as both games target a very different audience...

Do they?

This thread and most others should illustrate that yes, in fact they are targeted at very different audiences.

If thats true who woudl you say DA2 is catering too same for BG2

[Melness]

Lennonkun wrote...

Merced652 wrote...
This thread and most others should illustrate that yes, in fact they are targeted at very different audiences.

The reality however is that one audience is inherently superior to the other audience.

Only if one pays more than the other, and it doesn't.

[SpeakingInSilence]

What are actually today's standards? Better graphics? Better gameplay? I had a discussion the other day about what is more timeless. Live theater, or a movie, and what we came down to is anything with a better story. Plays can be bad, performed by horrible actors, and movies can be flashy but lack a story.



So what is my point here? My point is technology constantly is changing. What used to be amazing at one point of time visually is no longer amazing today visually, so what makes something timeless? A good story. This is why books are still popular, and a written story will never cease to exist.



With that said Baldur's Gate wasn't limited by technology when it came to story. They didn't need everyone to be voiced acted, and they really didn't need graphics to describe everything in the world. This is why Baldur's Gate was literally like playing a book. Everything in Baldur's Gate to me was more complex when it came to story. Even the romances. The romance between the main character and Jaheira to me was far more complex then anything I think DA:O had.

[Merced652]

Melness wrote...

Lennonkun wrote...

Merced652 wrote...
This thread and most others should illustrate that yes, in fact they are targeted at very different audiences.

The reality however is that one audience is inherently superior to the other audience.

Only if one pays more than the other, and it doesn't.

Incorrect. You're right at least in saying whichever pays more is superior, but wrong in saying that one doesn't. The one that pays more is the one that is more populous. Their larger population driving more unit sales than the opposing audience. Thus one is clearly superior in the minds of Bioware, and their games reflect that.

Modifié par Merced652, 20 février 2011 - 07:58 .

[Melness]

Merced652 wrote...

Incorrect. You're right at least in saying whichever pays more is superior, but wrong in saying that one doesn't. The one that pays more is the one that is more populous. Their larger population driving more unit sales than the opposing audience. Thus one is clearly superior in the minds of Bioware, and their games reflect that.

Sorry, I presumed he was talking about a more individual level.

[Melduran]

Those that would aruge that BG2 and DOA are completely different game I recommend you to try this mod out www.dragonagenexus.com/downloads/file.php give it a shot its only the first level of BG2 but it just goes to show that Dragon age origins and BG2 are only different by the matter of technology.

[FellowerOfOdin]

Melduran wrote...

Those that would aruge that BG2 and DOA are completely different game I recommend you to try this mod out www.dragonagenexus.com/downloads/file.php give it a shot its only the first level of BG2 but it just goes to show that Dragon age origins and BG2 are only different by the matter of technology.

Completely false statement.

I am familiar with the mod yet you mixed up DA:O with a fan-made mod. DA:O is the entire game. The toolset is not part of the game itself, but part of the whole package you bought. It might be nitpicking for some, yet I just can't let such a statement stand there in the open

[Merced652]

Melduran wrote...

Those that would aruge that BG2 and DOA are completely different game I recommend you to try this mod out www.dragonagenexus.com/downloads/file.php give it a shot its only the first level of BG2 but it just goes to show that Dragon age origins and BG2 are only different by the matter of technology.

Its like painting the mona lisa in water colors.

[Melduran]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

Melduran wrote...

Those that would aruge that BG2 and DOA are completely different game I recommend you to try this mod out www.dragonagenexus.com/downloads/file.php give it a shot its only the first level of BG2 but it just goes to show that Dragon age origins and BG2 are only different by the matter of technology.

Completely false statement.

I am familiar with the mod yet you mixed up DA:O with a fan-made mod. DA:O is the entire game. The toolset is not part of the game itself, but part of the whole package you bought. It might be nitpicking for some, yet I just can't let such a statement stand there in the open

It doesn't matter its a fan made mod it uses the mechanics of Origins and uses BG2 story how is that false? The only difference is one is a scroller and the other is 3D your missing my point. If BG2 was made with Origins technology it would be very similar.

[Anathemic]

Noilly Prat wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Melduran wrote...

What are you talking about dude?  When was gaming acceptable for you when it envolved a pie chart eating stars while being chased by ghosts? Or maybe when the Italian guy jumped from the stack of  blocks to reach the flag?  If you have a problem with Bioware games then what are you playing thats RPG and satisfying? Eve? Since games became 3D its not possible to budget the same size and depth and expect it to be released within a set time frame.  Whatever you playing now must be incredible.

Game called The Witcher

Okay, I like The Witcher a lot, but I think it's hilarious that so many people hold this game up as a model for RPG depth and untainted-by-the-consoles PC purity.  The combat was shallow, almost mindless hack-and-slash, bordering on terrible.  Seriously, God of War has more sophisticated and strategic combat.

Also, The Witcher didn't provide much room for creating distinct character builds.  One version of Geralt would turn out about the same as another, regardless of how you spent your talent points.  Sure, you could choose to emphasize magic over sword techniques, or favor one technique over another, but it never seemed to make much difference in terms of how you play the game, at least to me.

And The Witcher isn't even very old, so it's hardly representative of any supposed "golden age" of computer RPGs, I'd think.

Don't get me wrong, I still think it's one of the better computer RPGs I've played in a while, but I absolutely don't think it's deeper than Dragon Age.

I wasn't praising the Witcher, if you've read his post he demanded a RPG not BioWare that people play as he's another mindless BioWare fanboy, so I've suggested the Witcher, a non-BioWare RPG that people do play.

And when criticizing the Witcher, if you'd pay attention to pro-Witcher posts no one praises gameplay or character builds, that's stupid because if you played the game you'd know the game is weak in these regards. What makes the Witcher a great game is literature elements such as story, plot, and character.

And it's kind of hypocritical for a BioWare fan to not even mention these points when arguing games, doesn't BioWare pride themselves on the story element in their games? Stop beating the dead horse of gameplay and focus on why you love this company in the first place, story.

[Merced652]

Melduran wrote...

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

Melduran wrote...

Those that would aruge that BG2 and DOA are completely different game I recommend you to try this mod out www.dragonagenexus.com/downloads/file.php give it a shot its only the first level of BG2 but it just goes to show that Dragon age origins and BG2 are only different by the matter of technology.

Completely false statement.

I am familiar with the mod yet you mixed up DA:O with a fan-made mod. DA:O is the entire game. The toolset is not part of the game itself, but part of the whole package you bought. It might be nitpicking for some, yet I just can't let such a statement stand there in the open

It doesn't matter its a fan made mod it uses the mechanics of Origins and uses BG2 story how is that false? The only difference is one is a scroller and the other is 3D your missing my point. If BG2 was made with Origins technology it would be very similar.

But a game isn't just visuals. A game is a collection of systems that dictate how combat, conversation, and stories work. DA:O didn't use the same systems as BG2, therefore it will never be "just like bg2."

[Yrkoon]

Merced652 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

FellowerOfOdin wrote...
plus you can't really compare BG II to DA2 anyway as both games target a very different audience...

Do they?

This thread and most others should illustrate that yes, in fact they are targeted at very different audiences.

  Sure.  I'm not disagreeing with the notion, I'm just trying to understand  what  exactly those two audiences are.

BG2 was not a niche game.  It appealed to a vast Story *and*  tactical combat RPG fanbase.    DA:O did too.   But yeah, I think the Devs have made it clear that they're trying to appeal to a broader audience with DA2,  But when it's all said and done, and the game comes out and people discover whether or not their paranoia  was justified, I don't think DA2 will alienate the Story-based RPG fan  (read:  Bg2's core fanbase.)

They certainly haven't alienated me with  those changes they've been advertising.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 20 février 2011 - 08:46 .

[Fadook]

Merced652 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

FellowerOfOdin wrote...
plus you can't really compare BG II to DA2 anyway as both games target a very different audience...

Do they?

This thread and most others should illustrate that yes, in fact they are targeted at very different audiences.

Disagree completely. It's pretty clear to me that BW are trying to make a game that will attract the old-school BG crowd as well as the many customers who want a more fast-paced, visceral experience. Fro what I've seen on these forums, a lot of the BG2 fans have played Origins and will play DA2, perhaps realising that DA is the closest they're going to get to the days of the Infinity Engine games.

[Lord Gremlin]

Look, in all honesty right now, in 2011, BG2 gameplay can be considered crap. And that's not a bad or outrageous thing, it's just that industry evolves. Thing that are amazing at first later on become outdated and even later they become bad.

It's similar to hygiene. What was awesome in 10th century is disgusting in 21st.

BG2 was a good game, but you can't compare it to a game from 2011. This is ridiculous.

[Melduran]

I wasn't praising the Witcher, if you've read his post he demanded a RPG not BioWare that people play as he's another mindless BioWare fanboy, so I've suggested the Witcher, a non-BioWare RPG that people do play.

And when criticizing the Witcher, if you'd pay attention to pro-Witcher posts no one praises gameplay or character builds, that's stupid because if you played the game you'd know the game is weak in these regards. What makes the Witcher a great game is literature elements such as story, plot, and character.

And it's kind of hypocritical for a BioWare fan to not even mention these points when arguing games, doesn't BioWare pride themselves on the story element in their games? Stop beating the dead horse of gameplay and focus on why you love this company in the first place, story.

"A mindless Bioware fanboy" really? Had you read the post the man put up he stated Bioware wasn't for him and in closing saying and I quote." Happy Gaming simpletons",implying that hes mega ego could not be contained by such a simple game as Dragon age. why you even felt the urge to get involved in a statement that was for him well I guess your just a special snow flake, I was hardly implying only Bioware makes RPGs but to say that their not a company that has centered itself around RPGs is ignorant. I wished to know what game in the past was so brilliant and revolutionary and set the standard so long ago. Your post is rediculous no one is insulting the witcher your obviously mad at life and the moment someone contested your opioion you couldn't handle it perhaps your should take sometime and learn how to argue without this childish slander.

[drahelvete]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Look, in all honesty right now, in 2011, BG2 gameplay can be considered crap. And that's not a bad or outrageous thing, it's just that industry evolves. Thing that are amazing at first later on become outdated and even later they become bad.
It's similar to hygiene. What was awesome in 10th century is disgusting in 21st.
BG2 was a good game, but you can't compare it to a game from 2011. This is ridiculous.

It's not the gameplay people are praising...

[Yrkoon]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Look, in all honesty right now, in 2011, BG2 gameplay can be considered crap. And that's not a bad or outrageous thing, it's just that industry evolves. Thing that are amazing at first later on become outdated and even later they become bad.
It's similar to hygiene. What was awesome in 10th century is disgusting in 21st.
BG2 was a good game, but you can't compare it to a game from 2011. This is ridiculous.

But didn't Bioware's marketting do exactly that? DA:O was *literally* compared with BG2. A primary selling point was: " it's the spiritual successor to Bg2".

That's a comparison. The fact that it's a comparison that  also takes the gaming world's evolution into account is not really relevant. BG2 fans like myself aren't so dumb as to ignore the fact that gameplay  is in 3d now. The comparisons we're focussing on is story, character development, immersion.... arbitrary stuff like that which  *doesn't* change with the technology

Modifié par Yrkoon, 20 février 2011 - 08:57 .

[Anathemic]

Melduran wrote...

"A mindless Bioware fanboy" really? Had you read the post the man put up he stated Bioware wasn't for him and in closing saying and I quote." Happy Gaming simpletons",implying that hes mega ego could not be contained by such a simple game as Dragon age. why you even felt the urge to get involved in a statement that was for him well I guess your just a special snow flake, I was hardly implying only Bioware makes RPGs but to say that their not a company that has centered itself around RPGs is ignorant. I wished to know what game in the past was so brilliant and revolutionary and set the standard so long ago. Your post is rediculous no one is insulting the witcher your obviously mad at life and the moment someone contested your opioion you couldn't handle it perhaps your should take sometime and learn how to argue without this childish slander.

I felt the urge in butting in because you stated a statement full of crap, what is it?

" If you have a problem with Bioware games then what are you playing thats RPG and satisfying?"

What kind of statement is this? BioWare isn't the only company that maeks RPGs, many other people play non-BioWare RPGs and enjoy it. Seriously I don't mind fanboys but actually use logic in your argument.

[Lennonkun]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Look, in all honesty right now, in 2011, BG2 gameplay can be considered crap. And that's not a bad or outrageous thing, it's just that industry evolves. Thing that are amazing at first later on become outdated and even later they become bad.
It's similar to hygiene. What was awesome in 10th century is disgusting in 21st.
BG2 was a good game, but you can't compare it to a game from 2011. This is ridiculous.

It's people like you that make me hate this generation.

To use a music analogy, you just told me *insert current MTV rapper* is a better musician than the early Gregorian chants.

Remember how before I said some "opinions" are not subjective? This is one of them.

Is it an unfair comparison? Of course! But so is what you said.

[Rzepik2]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Look, in all honesty right now, in 2011, BG2 gameplay can be considered crap. And that's not a bad or outrageous thing, it's just that industry evolves. Thing that are amazing at first later on become outdated and even later they become bad.
It's similar to hygiene. What was awesome in 10th century is disgusting in 21st.
BG2 was a good game, but you can't compare it to a game from 2011. This is ridiculous.

No, no, no. If games are art, then age is just a number.
Technologicall progress =/= better quality of games
Usually yes, but in some cases, it can be quite the opposite. For example Simon the Sorcerer 3D and IMO Bioware games.

Modifié par Rzepik2, 20 février 2011 - 09:02 .