183 réponses à ce sujet

[Purple People Eater]

Ok, then I politely disagree with the OP, and in a very respectful nature would like to call his post uninspired, long, winded, and contrary to my own opinion.
Wait...can I curse in pig latin?, cuz I can do that all day.

[Faust1979]

actually it does help to try and gain a new fan base. New fans means more money and that means money to create new games. People seem to try and ignore the fact that Bioware is a business. Old school RPG games are on the way out, Dragon Age wasn't that much of a successor to Balduers Gate, the only thing they had in common was taking place in a fantasy setting. 20 years from now there will be people saying why won't they make RPGs anymore like they did in the 2000s! games need to change to survive

[madsabroo]

Not to rip on "core fan-base" people, whatever the hell that means, but knowing that most players didn't bother to look at origins other than "Male" and "Warrior" has got to be frustrating.

I'm not sure you can expect a company to continue making content for a base of players that only attempt to scratch the surface of the game. It's got to be demoralizing to put time, effort and creativity into something and then find out only a fraction of DA:O players ever looked at the dwarf origins or completed the more obscure side quests. If the people who are buying these games just want to play as humans, why funnel money and resources into things that almost nobody experiences?

I enjoyed playing through the different origins, many people on these forums did, but BioWare is responding to feedback given to them by the large percentage of casual gamers that do not come anywhere near these forums. It's logical, and I can't argue with their decision to change the direction of the franchise.

[Obadiah]

I think EA/Bioware is trying to tap into that mass of players that will play the game once, and will play it because it is fun.

[sycophantichallenger]

WuWeiWu wrote...

sycophantichallenger wrote...

WuWeiWu wrote...

XBenotto18 wrote...

Some of your points, your saying are true? No opinion is true as a fact because its your opinion and others will differ from yours.

He was asking that, for the purposes of this conversation and his posts, to assume his opinions as true. Which is a fair thing to ask, if he hadn't gone about it all wrong.

Can you accept that I am no longer interested in discussing whether the changes made between DA2 and DAO are "good" or "bad"? That I am not interested in having this thread devolve into the same conversation that occurs in EVERY thread? 

This is why my argument requires that this is accepted as true. Because I"m not interested in debating this point AGAIN!

But that is what your OP is asking me, someone who differs with your opinion, to do. There's a bit more involved with having something 'just accepted as fact' in any form of conversation, you can't shove it in my face and expect me to be fine with it. If you want a conversation, fix the OP; if you want nothing but yes-men to argue with you, leave it as is and I'll leave this thread.

Of course, I would point out first how you called BioWare out on their 'yes-men' and how much lulz are to be had by you turning around and doing the same thing.

Are you a religious man? Let's assume for the sake of this argument you are not. If you walk in to a church, would you attend and expect the pastor to "prove to you" the existence of god when it is already understood by BOTH parties that belief in god is an act of faith independent of whether god is or is not?

The same could be said for whether the changes to DA2 are "good" or "bad". It's a fruitless discussion that has been had many times over. I cannot prove to you the changes are good or bad, nor can you prove that point to me as our individual appraisal of it's qualities are ultimately subjective. Again, I'm not interested in having this discussion which is outside the scope of this thread.

As for the "yes men" point... I was referring to the recent interview of David Silverman where the interviewer was not asking any interestin questions. 

[Dr. wonderful]

Why do people always diss the artstyle?

That isn't "poor/childish."

[AkiKishi]

Faust1979 wrote...

actually it does help to try and gain a new fan base. New fans means more money and that means money to create new games. People seem to try and ignore the fact that Bioware is a business. Old school RPG games are on the way out, Dragon Age wasn't that much of a successor to Balduers Gate, the only thing they had in common was taking place in a fantasy setting. 20 years from now there will be people saying why won't they make RPGs anymore like they did in the 2000s! games need to change to survive

Yes and no. A lot of the people here have been with Bioware for over a decade (some even more). New fans will be transient for the most part. Especially the "flash bang" crowd who simply move on to the next big name release.
All but the most set in their ways fans accept change, but there is change because it needs to happen and therer is change just for the sake of change, or just change with the idea of making a quick $.

That's the sort of change DA underwent. If things like shorter game times, hack and slash, poor story end , shallow character etc. Proves true, you will see a lot of people who were previously saying "wait for the full game" out for blood.

[Sabresandiego]

Ever notice how some old people always complain about how everything sucks now and how things used to be good in the old days? Thats the mentality you have, its non-progressive. Sure there are many flaws with DA2 which I am not happy about either, but the improved combat and gameplay more than makes up for it in my eyes. DA2 is looking to be an awesome game, and I can't wait to play it.

[Ingthar]

sycophantichallenger wrote...

In less than 1 year the have done a complete 180 on many of the fronts that were CRITICAL in causing the first game to be the success that it was

Well, looks like the things critical for you (and me) weren't critical for the majority of players. I would expect Bioware took a deep insight into the gameplay feedbacks and chopped off anything not used by (the majority of) players as well as anything which led to confusion.

sycophantichallenger wrote...

I would argue that they significantly changed the way the game looks
(visual re-design), plays (awesome button), and is experienced (dialogue
system), changing core aspects of
the game.

Sad, but true.

Will i play DA2? Yes... I would like to experience the story... I will
wait a couple of months and purchase a used copy of the game from
EBGAMES. This is a conscious choice to vote with my dollars against
these changes as I realize that I can effect no change through
intelligent conversation or suggestion since this is not a feedback
mechanism that exists in a corporate world

Sad but true, the only way to vote against these changes is not to buy Dragon Age II.

But based on the responses in the feedback thread I wouldn't expect Dragon Age II to fail (in terms of sales). It looks like the majority of players appreciate the changes.

sycophantichallenger wrote...

***I'm glad that you've taken the opportunity to read these thoughts and hope to further disuss. Will I be shouted down by the mental mob? Probably? Will some people pick a small part of my post and pick it apart or point
out flawed or inconsistent logic in a rude or dismissive manner? Certainly.

Given on what happens to any criticism in any other thread... abandon any hope and be prepared to stand against fanboy spawn. :innocent:

sycophantichallenger wrote...

That is okay

No! That's not okay.

Edit: Fixed BBTags

Modifié par Ingthar, 27 février 2011 - 06:52 .

[PrinceOfFallout13]

nostalgia is a gamer worst enemy

[Tleining]

"So here is where it stands; DA2 is not created for or marketed to myself or those like me (passionate DAO, Baldur's Gate, classic RPG fans). I have always enjoyed BIOWARE games in the based, in part because of the quality of the story. "

This pretty much sums your post up to me. The one thing missing is your feeling of betrayal. DA2 is created for Fans of RPGs and Tactical Games. They added action to increase sales (appealing to shooter-fans). Passionate classic RPG Fans are still included in the targeted consumers. Yet somehow, you ARE a passionate classic RPG-Fan, those like me, who can't wait for DA2, are not. Curious.

What i don't understand, is why you have to open such a huge can of worms over it. There are several games i didn't like, i posted my impression/complaint over it, and didn't buy the game. And that was that. Did the Developer betray me? Seeing how i didn't pay them for that game, not really. Does the developer have some sort of obligation to me, to continously make games that appeal to me? Doubtful.

[Kharn-ivor]

"If internal BIOWARE or EA eyes do happen across this forum post, could you please pass it up the chain that IT IS NOT FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE TO ALIENATE YOUR EXISTING FAN BASE IN THE PERSUIT OF A PERCEIVED NEW MARKET. If you see that new market and would like to appeal to it, create a new product... a new IP. Don't missapropriate existing IP to fit a new mold.."

Thats totaly untrue, if the new market is bigger and spends more then it makes sence....its capitalism, they make a product : if you dont like it, dont buy it.
Dragon age is a product, they need to make money if they think the console market is a better target they have every right to go for it and it probably makes sence, unfortunatly.

Now its true that a company may feel they can make more money by keeping a set of consumers happy from one product to the next, its not some kind of law.

Modifié par Kharn-ivor, 27 février 2011 - 06:58 .

[AngelicMachinery]

I R IMMERSION use me when ur mad bros.

Modifié par AngelicMachinery, 27 février 2011 - 06:56 .

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...

actually it does help to try and gain a new fan base. New fans means more money and that means money to create new games. People seem to try and ignore the fact that Bioware is a business. Old school RPG games are on the way out, Dragon Age wasn't that much of a successor to Balduers Gate, the only thing they had in common was taking place in a fantasy setting. 20 years from now there will be people saying why won't they make RPGs anymore like they did in the 2000s! games need to change to survive

Yes and no. A lot of the people here have been with Bioware for over a decade (some even more). New fans will be transient for the most part. Especially the "flash bang" crowd who simply move on to the next big name release.
All but the most set in their ways fans accept change, but there is change because it needs to happen and therer is change just for the sake of change, or just change with the idea of making a quick $.

That's the sort of change DA underwent. If things like shorter game times, hack and slash, poor story end , shallow character etc. Proves true, you will see a lot of people who were previously saying "wait for the full game" out for blood.

Your post seems to imply that shorter game times are bad. If the quality of story is better it doesnt matter. i think most would rather that the story doesnt over stay its welcome and they take the time needed to tell there story and not add filler just to make it longer. Also the game is not hack and slash.You have the option of playing it that way. You do not need to. To generalize a game like that based on an option you dont have to follow is very misleading and is like saying "the game poses no challenge" when you neglect to say you played it on easy.

[sycophantichallenger]

Kharn-ivor wrote...

"If internal BIOWARE or EA eyes do happen across this forum post, could you please pass it up the chain that IT IS NOT FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE TO ALIENATE YOUR EXISTING FAN BASE IN THE PERSUIT OF A PERCEIVED NEW MARKET. If you see that new market and would like to appeal to it, create a new product... a new IP. Don't missapropriate existing IP to fit a new mold.."

Thats totaly untrue, if the new market is bigger and spends more then it makes sence....its capitalism, they make a product : if you dont like if dont buy it.
Dragon age is a product, they need to make money if they think the console market is a better target they have every right to go for it and it probably makes sence, unfortunatly.

Now its true that a company may feel they can make more money by keeping a set of consumers happy from one product to the next, its not some kind of law.

How does it make sense to risk negatively affecting a positive revenue stream to generate a new one? 

If BIOWARE wants to create a new IP w/ completely re-designed gameplay, good on them, I wish them success.

Imagine you were to buy Civilizations 6 on the fact that you've purchased and enjoyed past Civilizations games but it just so happens they've redesigned the game so that the combat component is a beatemup brawler... I think you can understand if previous CIV fans have a strong opinion of the changes.

[Marionetten]

PrinceOfFallout13 wrote...

nostalgia is a gamer worst enemy

How so? If not for Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn I would have given up on gaming a long time ago. That game has kept me interested for a decade. In fact, I think I'll reinstall it to keep me company until Dragon Age II. Another wild mage playthrough sounds fun.

[DTKT]

Marionetten wrote...

DTKT wrote...

Keep in mind that they dont need to win the "gamer" over. You already read coverage on the game, you read the reviews, you are a member of the "insert game name" forum.

True. But not keeping the gamer satisfied will result in said gamer eventually getting fed up. This is something which both BioWare and EA have conveniently overlooked with their marketing. When you have David Silverman badmouthing Dragon Age: Origins and its audience during an interview you have to wonder what they're trying to accomplish. Whatever it is it's certainly not pretty.

Technically, if the target market is bigger, they shouldnt care about the first one. That's simply the way a franchise evolves in something "bigger". That doesnt equate to "better" but it's the way of things. 

I havent watched the interview with the marketing director but from what I've heard, he might have thought that it was the correct stance to take with the guy asking questions and what is the general message he wanted to get accross.

The overall marketing doesnt feel as "fratboy" as he makes it seems though.

 don't know what the online/offline split is for COD but most of the COD players I know, or know of could not give a crap about the SP campaign. They are in it purely for the head to head stuff. 

Well, there's the challenge. How do you reach a community that isnt part of that "gamer" demographic. That's probably what DAII wanted to figure out or what DAO tried with that god-awful Marylin Manson song with the Warden trailer. (I dont mind the artist, but the mix of the two...)

[OmegaBlue0231]

The moment you mention the redesign as childish was the moment I stopped reading your post. That shows a deep lack of respect for the team who worked hard on it.

Whenever people complain only because it's not exactly the same as the game they loved I think of this http://www.vgcats.co...s/?strip_id=296

Modifié par OmegaBlue0231, 27 février 2011 - 07:40 .

[Sabresandiego]

Do you know how many people complained that Modern Warfare 2 was a failure of a game for its lack of dedicated servers? It was the best selling FPS of all time and next years sale of Black Ops sales were even better.

The fact is this, DA2 is BETTER than origins. Gameplay sucked in origins, combat was totally imbalanced due to potions, invulns, and bad game mechanics. Origins was a great game due to story, art, writing, and fun factor, and had good combat animations. DA2 takes the good from Origins, and fixes what was wrong with it ----> the gameplay.

There are flaws with DA2. For example, I know for a fact that you can make fast responsive combat that is more appealing to a mature audience and doesnt suffer from ninja/anime teen appeal. I would prefer a more mature setting, with less cartoonish graphics, slightly more realistic combat without over the top moves, etc... BUT I am willing to accept the shortcomings of DA2 because they are far less than the games improvements. Responsive gameplay is absolutely essential for me, its why I loved ME2 and couldnt play origins more than once. DA2 is a HUGE improvement over origins.

[Lennonkun]

distinguetraces wrote...

What bewilders me about the dialogue-wheel rage is ... were these people really satisfied with the "role-playing choices" under the previous system?

A handful of slightly different ways to phrase your acceptance of the same quest do not really give a lot of scope to define a unique character. It's always been the case that Bioware's writers created a personality for your hero, and confined the possible variations on that personality to a very narrow range. And why not? They are the ones telling the story.

Did you really never notice this until the dialogue options were arrayed around a ring rather than stacked in a list? I just don't get it.

Having 3 dialogue options that, while ultimately lead to the exact same result, be cut into only 1 is irritating. Some people brought up the opening dialogue of Planescape: Torment. Yea all those options really mean nothing, but its the principle of the matter that you actually have a choice in what you are saying.

Also my personal thoughts on the matter, I'm indifferent on the wheel honestly, I see the reasoning for, and against it. Personally though, what I'd like to see is dialogue options built upon stats. Take PS:T again. If you play a stupid character, holy crap are you stupid. It is painfully noticable in the game through the dialogue available to you.  Meanwhile playing a smart character you have signifigantly more options open to actually... be smart.

In DA2, and even DA:O, there isn't. You are just average old Hawke/Warden forced to choose the default options and nothing changes those options. You can't actually show any degree of mental intelligence, or lack thereof.

[Rockpopple]

My response to the OP: I suggest you take another look at DA:O before you declare DA:2 a bastard child. All they did was take what they did in DA:O and amp it up, or made things more efficient.

The change in the dialogue system was essentially distilled from what they were in DA:O in order to accommodate voice-work. In DA:O you had a bunch of options, many of which would repeat themselves depending on the dialogue tree. In DA:2, you still have many options to choose from, not just the 3 for every time you speak (which is what was in the demo, but if you look at screens there are sometimes 4 choices to choose from) and always an Investigate choice that brings up even more dialogue, essentially the same dialogue you could choose from the old school DA:O dialogue tree. Just more efficient.

The redesign. Poor? Childish? I'm not gonna bother posting comparison pictures, but they're definitely not poor, or childish. If they are in your opinion, so be it, but the facts are the graphics are the same with a little more style. What's your complaint, exactly? Faces are not long enough? The faces are too expressive? What is it? Are you complaining that the graphics in the demo are too drab? Again, play DA:O again. It was a sea of brown and beige. DA:2 will have more colour in it. Yeah, the demo only had 2 areas, one Kirkwall at night with no npcs and the other a ruined town. Not the best examples. But to declare the artstyle poor and childish? Please.

Your problem with the gameplay? Again, it's just DA:O amped up. You don't like it, don't buy it, but don't claim it's radically different. No, the auto-attack didn't work in the demo, but it will in the full. But in DA:O, you pressed X, you sat back and you watched the attack and gave everyone orders that they needed. Even on the hardest levels, it's really an option of gameplay. In DA:2, the game was set on Normal difficulty, which is known that you don't need a high level of tactical play to get by. In any case, the gameplay in DA2 is the same as in DA:O, just faster. So if it's ruined the appeal for you, I wonder if you really liked the gameplay in DA:O in the first place.

And lastly, the interviewer didn't insult anyone. He said if people liked to "geek out" and blah blah. So what? You don't like being called a geek? You should get some thicker skin, pal. Chances are if you're playing video games and watching genre movies and shows, you are a geek. Since when was that a bad thing? I'm a geek. I geek out on stuff. I don't get butthurt about it when people say I do.

Just my opinions.

P.S. Oh, and pre-declaring anyone that disagrees with you "mental" and or "fanboy spawn"? classy manoeuvre. I'd say keep it up, but I doubt you were thinking of stopping soon.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 27 février 2011 - 07:12 .

[DTKT]

Sabresandiego wrote...

Do you know how many people complained that Modern Warfare 2 was a failure of a game for its lack of dedicated servers? It was the best selling FPS of all time and next years sale of Black Ops sales were even better.

The fact is this, DA2 is BETTER than origins. Gameplay sucked in origins, combat was totally imbalanced due to potions, invulns, and bad game mechanics. Origins was a great game due to story, art, writing, and fun factor, and had good combat animations. DA2 takes the good from Origins, and fixes what was wrong with it ----> the gameplay.

There are flaws with DA2. For example, I know for a fact that you can make fast responsive combat that is more appealing to a mature audience and doesnt suffer from ninja/anime teen appeal. I would prefer a more mature setting, with less cartoonish graphics, slightly more realistic combat without over the top moves, etc... BUT I am willing to accept the shortcomings of DA2 because they are far less than the games improvements. Responsive gameplay is absolutely essential for me, its why I loved ME2 and couldnt play origins more than once. DA2 is a HUGE improvement over origins.

Keep in mind that again, (I feel like a broken record) it's your own perception of the changes between DAO and DAII. It's more than likely that the "redesign" between the two games might have upset or disappointed many of the old fans. Fans who enjoyed the tactical view, the tactical combat, the silent PC, the conversation system, the different origins etc.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

I personally like the changes they made, but then I also liked the cinematic experience of Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2. A fully voiced protagonist is better. Just because you see every word you say on the screen or else you hear it, how does that change that the game is a roleplaying game? Seriously.

Everyone is however entitled to their opinion, but I agree with those that say if you "hate" enough to make this thread, don't buy/play the game.. because.. if you buy it, obviously your concerns were not big enough to prevent you from buying the game, so they wont' mean as much.