196 réponses à ce sujet

[falconlord5]

Anathemic wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...


Then look up the game yourself? I could go on to explain the Witcher, but obviously you don't want that (unless you want to take it into PM),

I know what the Witcher is. Going to buy the original before I get 2, 'cause I just upgraded my computer. Actually, I've been looking for English translations of the books, any suggestions where I can find 'em?

My friends however, have no clue. And they look at me weird whenever I try to explain it to them.

I bought mine off Amazon, currently only 2 books have been translated, The Last Wish and Blood of Elves

Damn. Thanks, though.

[Walker White]

All gamer forums everywhere, including this one, as massive feedback loops of a minority of the customer base. This is why every single game company, not just BioWare, data mines the crap out of player data. Because that is the only way to tell what people actually like. Not forums of made up of players who have very narrow concepts of what constitutes an RPG (concepts sometimes that violate the spirit of the hobby as it started in the 70s and 80s).

[Buffy-Summers]

Yes, i worried about ME2 and i thought it was a stripped down RPG that favored pow boom bif over thought and strategy

[Walker White]

Buffy-Summers wrote...

Yes, i worried about ME2 and i thought it was a stripped down RPG that favored pow boom bif over thought and strategy

ME2 had infinitely more strategy than ME1.  What you comparing it to?

[Revan312]

drahelvete wrote...

Revan312 wrote...

It would be like showing a Ferrari off to car enthusiasts and yet only being concerned about soccer mom's and their thoughts about it.

Just because a car looks good, doesn't mean it's fast or handles well.

Your correct, but that wasn't my point.  I was making a point that the only objective test of worth comes from people who are interested in said products and are the consumers who will purchase them. Soccer moms might think the Ferrari is cool looking, but they're not gonna buy one.

falconlord5 wrote...
I did, actually, show them TW2. They thought it was Assasin's Creed, I kid you not (I had to count to ten, after that).

And by the way, most gamers don't come anywhere near the gaming forums. We are a tiny, insignificant minority in the much, much larger gaming world.

So, it's more like showing a Ferrari off to people who only care about a very specific make and model of Ferrari, and basing all your design decisions on that.

Which is the only opinions to go off of, is that tiny minority, that's my point.  Showing off a power drill to homeless Jamaicans means nothing, showing off a remington to teenagers at the mall means nothing.. showing a game to random friends/coworkers that aren't into games means nothing.

Walker White wrote...
ME2 had infinitely more strategy than ME1.  What you comparing it to?

HAHAHA, your funny.. good one *wipes tears from eyes* infinitely.. hoo boy..

A game of whack a mole with global cooldowns doesn't mean ME2 had strategy, it means it didn't have any.. Not that ME1 had any either..

Modifié par Revan312, 20 février 2011 - 05:48 .

[keginkc]

Nefario wrote...

Is that really true? I mean I haven't seen anything negative about TW2, but I haven't really seen a whole lot either way. And I occasionally check out the forums for TW2, and there's a good deal of freak-outs and nerd rage there too - particularly over the "consolization" of the game (sounds familiar, no?). I guess there's less bad mojo there than there is here, but these forums are much more active.

People who were vested in the witcher will like the witcher 2.  People who were vested in dragon age origins will like dragon age.  The graphics for both of them are superficial.

I played both when they came out, have re-played both this year, and will be getting both sequels when they come out, but at the end of the day, they're vastly different games.  If you want a good, traditional party based RPG, you get dragon age 2.   If you want to get a single player action RPG with light and easy combat, you get the witcher 2.  It's comparing apples to oranges, basically.

I don't think the graphics really matters all that much in either one.  How they play is what will ultimately matter.

But then again, they're not trying to sell the games to me, since I'm already buying them both.  Maybe somebody who isn't a long-time RPG player like me would have a different reaction to looking at each.

[falconlord5]

Revan312 wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...
I did, actually, show them TW2. They thought it was Assasin's Creed, I kid you not (I had to count to ten, after that).

And by the way, most gamers don't come anywhere near the gaming forums. We are a tiny, insignificant minority in the much, much larger gaming world.

So, it's more like showing a Ferrari off to people who only care about a very specific make and model of Ferrari, and basing all your design decisions on that.

Which is the only opinions to go off of, is that tiny minority, that's my point.  Showing off a power drill to homeless Jamaicans means nothing, showing off a remington to teenagers at the mall means nothing.. showing a game to random friends/coworkers that aren't into games means nothing.

No, it isn't. You could go off the surveys that they used to include in the game manuals, or sales data, which is what companies actually do.

And besides, you listen to the forums at Gamespot, home to the most virulent trolls I've ever known (and that includes the forums as SWTOR, which are insane). So your credibility is lacking, somewhat. Further, all forums are negative in tone. All of 'em, everywhere. No sane company listens to the general tone of us, 'cause we do nothing but whine.

They listen to those who provide actual feedback, and roll into the data that they acquire from the majority customer base.

[Revan312]

falconlord5 wrote...
No, it isn't. You could go off the surveys that they used to include in the game manuals, or sales data, which is what companies actually do.

And besides, you listen to the forums at Gamespot, home to the most virulent trolls I've ever known (and that includes the forums as SWTOR, which are insane). So your credibility is lacking, somewhat. Further, all forums are negative in tone. All of 'em, everywhere. No sane company listens to the general tone of us, 'cause we do nothing but whine.

They listen to those who provide actual feedback, and roll into the data that they acquire from the majority customer base.

I never said it was good data, I said it was all there is.. I'm speaking about pre-release game hype.. That's solely what I'm refering to. Neither game is out, neither game can have actual feedback, so all there is to go off of with public opinion is gaming sites and forums.

[keginkc]

falconlord5 wrote...

s the forums as SWTOR, which are insane).

You're right about that.  I got on the tor forums when they originally opened (when was that, february of 2009?).  I think I've been there a handful of times since.  BioWare boards are always bad, going back years and years, but those may be the worst, most crazily negative BW boards I've ever had the 'pleasure' of posting on.

Part of that's the audience, I think.  The WoW boards were really, really bad.  I don't remember them, but I'm sure the EQ boards were, too.

But yeah, gamespot comments are usually just crazy.

[Walker White]

Revan312 wrote...

Walker White wrote...
ME2 had infinitely more strategy than ME1.  What you comparing it to?

HAHAHA, your funny.. good one *wipes tears from eyes* infinitely.. hoo boy..

A game of whack a mole with global cooldowns doesn't mean ME2 had strategy, it means it didn't have any.. Not that ME1 had any either..

Play as an Adept or Engineer on Insanity.  It is just as strategic as DA:O below nightmare.  Particularly since Cold Spells+Duelist = Instant Win for anyone except bosses.

ME1, however, was push button to win when you had Biotics.  And the whole point of the OP was of the worries about ME2 given what people liked about ME1.  Say what you may about the other streamlining of ME1, strategic combat was not something that was made worse.

Modifié par Walker White, 20 février 2011 - 05:56 .

[falconlord5]

Revan312 wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...
No, it isn't. You could go off the surveys that they used to include in the game manuals, or sales data, which is what companies actually do.

And besides, you listen to the forums at Gamespot, home to the most virulent trolls I've ever known (and that includes the forums as SWTOR, which are insane). So your credibility is lacking, somewhat. Further, all forums are negative in tone. All of 'em, everywhere. No sane company listens to the general tone of us, 'cause we do nothing but whine.

They listen to those who provide actual feedback, and roll into the data that they acquire from the majority customer base.

I never said it was good data, I said it was all there is.. I'm speaking about pre-release game hype.. That's solely what I'm refering to. Neither game is out, neither game can have actual feedback, so all there is to go off of with public opinion is gaming sites and forums.

To quote my stepmother (head of marketing for a company herself): Never make a decision based on bad data.

The fans panic, it's what we do (well, I don't, but I'll admit I'm weird). The company, any company, has to be very, very careful with how well they take us seriously. This is especially true before the game comes out, 'cause all our fears are based on the smoke and mirrors of a marketing campaign.

[Revan312]

Walker White wrote...

Play as an Adept or Engineer on Insanity.  It is just as strategic as DA:O below nightmare.  Particularly since Cold Spells+Duelist = Instant Win for anyone except bosses.

ME1, however, was push button to win when you had Biotics.  And the whole point of the OP was of the worries about ME2 given what people liked about ME1.  Say what you may about the other streamlining of ME1, strategic combat was not something that was made worse.

I have played as an adept on nightmare, and it's not strategic, its mind numbingly repetative.  It's just enemies with larger shield/barrier/armor pools that you have to churn through before your biotics do jack all.. It's not strategy, it's boredom.

Mass Effect 1 and 2 are both equally lacking strategy. One allows you to blow all your crap at once and dominate everything and the other forces you to cower endlessly for gut wrenchingly long periods of time while you stand up and crouch over and over and over..

The only reason I liked ME1 more was because of the characters and the story, as ME2 michael bayed up both of those, which just isn't up my alley.

Regardless, DA:O on casual had 1000 times more strategy and combat depth than either ME1 or 2 imo..

*edit* - not nightmare.. insanity.. that's what I meant

falconlord5 wrote...

To quote my stepmother (head of marketing for a company herself): Never make a decision based on bad data.

The
fans panic, it's what we do (well, I don't, but I'll admit I'm weird).
The company, any company, has to be very, very careful with how well
they take us seriously. This is especially true before the game comes
out, 'cause all our fears are based on the smoke and mirrors of a
marketing campaign.

Like I said though, it's all there is to go off of so it's how I'm perceiving the current opinion about either game. And although such radically vocal weirdos aren't a good test for actual consumer sentiment, when the level of bias is reaching the levels it is for these two games it makes me a bit concerned for how the public will react when the games are compared post release..

Modifié par Revan312, 20 février 2011 - 06:12 .

[Augustei]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

drahelvete wrote...

There were lots of people worrying about DA:O not living up to the BG games and NWN too.

Seriously? Besides ME1, NWN was BioWare's worst game, hands down.

NWN biowares worst game? Please tell me your joking

[XBenotto18]

Hes not joking because it really is the worst bioware game EVER!

[falconlord5]

Revan312 wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...

To quote my stepmother (head of marketing for a company herself): Never make a decision based on bad data.

The
fans panic, it's what we do (well, I don't, but I'll admit I'm weird).
The company, any company, has to be very, very careful with how well
they take us seriously. This is especially true before the game comes
out, 'cause all our fears are based on the smoke and mirrors of a
marketing campaign.

Like I said though, it's all there is to go off of so it's how I'm perceiving the current opinion about either game. And although such radically vocal weirdos aren't a good test for actual consumer sentiment, when the level of bias is reaching the levels it is for these two games it makes me a bit concerned for how the public will react when the games are compared post release..

All you have, not all BioWare has. And the level of bias here is pretty standard for every game ever produced.

See, that's the problem I have. I've heard all this before, game after game after game, its always the same old song and dance. And if I've heard it some many times before, how many times do you think the devs have?

Makes it a little hard to take the forums seriously after a while.

[AlanC9]

Revan312 wrote...

Walker White wrote...
ME2 had infinitely more strategy than ME1.  What you comparing it to?

HAHAHA, your funny.. good one *wipes tears from eyes* infinitely.. hoo boy..

A game of whack a mole with global cooldowns doesn't mean ME2 had strategy, it means it didn't have any.. Not that ME1 had any either..

Well, if ME1 had zero strategy, then any amount of strategy in ME2 would be an infinite improvement.

Yeah, I get that your position is that they both have zero.

Modifié par AlanC9, 20 février 2011 - 06:59 .

[Noilly Prat]

I realize that it's true that a lot of gamers care more about graphics than anything else, and, as I already said, many of these people may favor a game like The Witcher 2 for that reason alone.

There are, however, other gamers (such as myself) who enjoy a good party-based western RPG with a lot of character customization and dialogue options, and who value these things over graphics.  People in this camp may feel they have more reason to be excited about DA 2.  (Note that this has nothing to do with how good the games are... DA 2 could end up being crap and TW 2 could be amazing, and of course I would always rather play an amazing game than a crap game, but the fact remains that DA is more my style of RPG than The Witcher, in general terms.)

What I meant when I said that the graphical comparisons mean nothing is simply this: assuming that some aspect of some game represents a standard to which all other games should adhere works both ways.  Sure, we can say "The Witcher 2 looks great, why doesn't DA 2 look like that?  Is BioWare stuck in the past?"  But we could just as well say "DA 2 lets us play as a woman, why doesn't The Witcher do that?  Is CD Projekt stuck in the past?"  For this reason, I don't consider these to be particularly meaningful comparisons.  (See also: "Why aren't all games as big as Oblivion?"  "Why aren't all games as hard as Ikaruga?"  "Why don't all games have as many long cutscenes as Metal Gear Solid?" etc.)

The point is, they're different games that are doing different things.

One more note about the graphics-- while I agree that The Witcher 2 looks better than DA 2 based on what I've seen of the two games (as most would agree), I also think that the art styles are different enough that a direct comparison is a bit difficult.  This, I think, is a little bit like complaining about how No More Heroes doesn't look as good as God of War.  Sure, they're both hack-and-slash games, but they're shooting for very different targets aesthetically.  (Granted, DA and The Witcher probably have a bit more in common than these two games, but I stand by my basic point.)

[Silvanend]

Yup, and the game always lacks in some area, like the story in mass effect 2, felt more like a filler and less of an actuall game. Kinda a disaster.

[Dan_cw]

I was here at the release of Mass Effect 2 and it wasn't a pretty sight (never saw the pre-release complaining though). I wasn't here at Origin's release though.

In any case, people were right about ME 2 being turned into more of a shooter but honestly, that didn't make it a bad game.

So, I'm not sure it's fair to compare the criticisms of ME 2 to DA 2, because they're on a different wave-length (from a gameplay perspective). At the end of the day, DA 2 is still pretty similar to DA: O from a combat and gameplay standpoint.

Modifié par Dan_cw, 20 février 2011 - 09:17 .

[Gvaz]

Walker White wrote...

Buffy-Summers wrote...

Yes, i worried about ME2 and i thought it was a stripped down RPG that favored pow boom bif over thought and strategy

ME2 had infinitely more strategy than ME1.  What you comparing it to?

ME2 was more strategic than ME1, but even on insanity as an Infiltrator, the game was whack a mole. No AI increase, just flat nerf of PC damage/health and buff of enemy damage and health.

With the DLC armors or weapons, it was still a cakewalk. Starting from scratch was more difficult, but barely so.

[Nohvarr]

What I'm hearing from some posters, is that since the only 'fan feedback' they are hearing is negative, that must be indicative of the games poor future sales. However they also admit that the data itself is biased, since the source tends to be negative anyways.



So my question is, if you know the source is flawed and unreliable (and we do, as the success of ME 2, Borderlands, Metroid Prime etc prove) why would you attempt to draw a conclusion from that data?

[Dan_cw]

I think it's a case of working out which are valid and not valid criticisms. I.e, taking a look at your product and seeing what you personally agree with.

Looking at it from a writer's perspective which may or may not apply to games, you should listen to all of the critiques given on a piece but you don't need to act on every little thing.

But it can be hard sorting out what should be listened to and what shouldn't at times. I imagine it's worse for game developers given the state of the game community and the web in general.

(Then there's also the problem of working out whether the vocal people on the internet even represent the majority of gamers.)

Modifié par Dan_cw, 20 février 2011 - 10:43 .