300 réponses à ce sujet

[ErebUs890]

lol I played both the console and PC version of DA:O, and just the gameplay in the DA2 demo was 10x better than DA:Os gameplay... So, I disagree.

[LPPrince]

Well, I haven't started a NEW playthrough, but I did go back through Witch Hunt with my canon Warden so that I could correct the Dark Ritual information.

Dialogue didn't feel that different.

Combat? Holy *insert expletive here*.

It felt a lot slower and the shuffling was way more noticeable and a pain.

DA2's combat is FAR superior to DAO's. But that's the biggest difference I noticed.

Everything else wasn't so different that I cared to react.

[Dubya75]

Stopped reading at "In DA2, theres none of this...". Statement based on demo only.

[JamesMoriarty123]

Rakia_Time wrote...

I can't go back to Origins after playing the demo...i tried but i just can't...

This from someone who has a picture of Mike Thornton as his avatar? Just about the crappest RPG ever...

Obsidian RUIN games...fact. They shouldn't even be allowed to create.

NWN2 - Ruined. KotOR 2 - Ruined. New Vegas - Kinda good but still, a rehash.

[JamesMoriarty123]

Rakia_Time wrote...

I can't go back to Origins after playing the demo...i tried but i just can't...

This from someone who has a picture of Mike Thornton as his avatar? Just about the crappest RPG ever...

Obsidian RUIN games...fact. They shouldn't even be allowed to create.
NWN2 - Ruined. KotOR 2 - Ruined. New Vegas - Kinda good but still, a rehash.

But that's by the by, IMO, based on the demo only, I prefer Origins style to the new style. I like the slower combat, the tactics, it seems in DA2 I don't even have to fight, I can just stand around and enemies die.

Modifié par JamesMoriarty123, 01 mars 2011 - 09:28 .

[Valmarn]

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...

And another one comparing a full fledged game with a demo ... *sigh*

Well, a lot of DAO fans are displeased with the way DA2 has looked in the gameplay footage.

How do you expect them to react to the demo?

What bothers me is that they (BioWare) know well enough that quite a few fans of Dragon Age: Origins are a little perturbed with the direction taken with Dragon Age 2, and BW's main concern isn't to maintain their DAO fanbase.

Perhaps BioWare realizes that Dragon Age 2 doesn't have anything to offer that would change their minds, so they would just as soon make a demo that will help garner new customers.

[LPPrince]

Mr. Sherlock Holmes' worst enemy 123, I dare you to film yourself playing DA2 while just standing there, letting the game play itself, and see if you can beat it.

Hell, do it on Casual. For the lulz.

[Valmarn]

Rakia_Time wrote...

I can't go back to Origins after playing the demo...i tried but i just can't...

Vice-versa for me.

[ManiacalEvil]

Valmarn wrote...

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...

And another one comparing a full fledged game with a demo ... *sigh*

Well, a lot of DAO fans are displeased with the way DA2 has looked in the gameplay footage.

How do you expect them to react to the demo?

What bothers me is that they (BioWare) know well enough that quite a few fans of Dragon Age: Origins are a little perturbed with the direction taken with Dragon Age 2, and BW's main concern isn't to maintain their DAO fanbase.

Perhaps BioWare realizes that Dragon Age 2 doesn't have anything to offer that would change their minds, so they would just as soon make a demo that will help garner new customers.

Or perhaps they wanted to let them see how similar DA2 is to DA:O? They succeeded.

[LPPrince]

What you have to understand is that these changes made to the game have the same backing as those that were made to ME2.

They are there to attract NEW players, while keeping a lot of the juicy steak(or crisp salad for you veggie lovers) that keeps OLD players with them.

Its a delicate balance.

Usually, it goes like this-

New gamer to a series-"Oh, this is cool, and so is this, but this is LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it PLOX"

Old gamer to a series-"Okay, this is still good, this is still here, nice nice nice WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WHAT? LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it back PLOX"

Either way, not everyone will be satisfied.

Bioware won't be affected if they hear that some oldies won't play the game. Thats expected.

Bioware won't be affected if they hear that some newbies won't play the game. That's expected.

What they WILL get worried about is if they hear that their whole game is trash and a lot of people won't be playing it, new players and old players alike.

From what I can tell, DA2 is not shaping up to be a complete disaster, nor is it shaping up to be a mediocre title that will be forgotten in time.

Its shaping up to be another major AAA title from a AAA developer that millions will play and millions will enjoy.

Bioware will smile at that.

[Morocius]

Valmarn wrote...

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...

And another one comparing a full fledged game with a demo ... *sigh*

Well, a lot of DAO fans are displeased with the way DA2 has looked in the gameplay footage.

How do you expect them to react to the demo?

What bothers me is that they (BioWare) know well enough that quite a few fans of Dragon Age: Origins are a little perturbed with the direction taken with Dragon Age 2, and BW's main concern isn't to maintain their DAO fanbase.

Perhaps BioWare realizes that Dragon Age 2 doesn't have anything to offer that would change their minds, so they would just as soon make a demo that will help garner new customers.

A lot of fans would have been disapointed regardless of what hey did, a lot of the conclussions made about the demo tell more about the person then about the actual game.

[moilami]

DA2 helped me to find my inner story based FPS enthusiastic and action adventurer I have lost. Thanks for that. Will have tons of good time playing all those games I have just looked down last 10 years.

[Dsentinel]

Wow comparing a demo to a full complete game. That's like comparing a game that took 7 years to make, to a game that took 2...oh wait.

[Amioran]

KLUME777 wrote...
In DAO, you always start the game with your PC in a conversation, and it takes at least 10 minutes to get into a fight, and thats if you rush. There is so much lore and atmosphere and feelings, story building up at the beggining of the game, its non-linear, and people to talk to.

This is what they wanted to achieve. Introducing new players to let them see the gameplay and try how it feels to be strong. It is meant to introduce new players on the mechanics of RPGs. The inconvenience of this genre, in fact, is that it has a steep learning curve. Many newcomers that would either like the genre are kept away from it just because they see nothing of attractive in the beginning. If you don't have a reason to do what you do then it is much more probable that you will just lose interest, especially if you are used to have motivations.

This is different  for those that are already interested in the genre. They know perfectly how good it is to create a powerful build and how the story role makes you tied to the game, they perfectly know the beauty of RPGs. However newcomers find the first 5-6 hours or so of RPGs daunting just because they don't understand well what to do nor they have a motivation to continue.

Instead in DA2 you get to try at once a powerful build. You get to see what you can become and what you can expect. This creates a motivation, that, after, grows in the real experience; but this process is done smoothly. You have now that motivation that keeps you going forward.

KLUME777 wrote...
In DA2, theres none of this, no tension culminating.

Tension is build upon in various ways. There is not set rule. Apart this, then neither the "prologues" of DAO had tension, apart maybe the Human Noble Origin or either the Femal City Elf, but also in those cases the real tension was much later than the tiny part showed on the demo of DA2.

KLUME777 wrote...
The whole demo (is this really the begginning of DA2?) you just fight enemies, with hardly any conversation or exploring, just boring, linear battle (plus the german review said most the whole game including Kirkwall was linear).

Again, this is done purposedly, to introduce new players to the genre. There's nothing wrong with it. Once those newcomers are "hooked" then the real RPG mechanics can start, since they have now a motivation to try it, differently from usual.

As I said there's nothing wrong with trying to gather a larger audience at beginning. You should be happy about it since this wlll mean that the genre will continue to exist and will not only be a niche market (that doesn't enable devs to have great production values to continue to expand and develop their ideas).

KLUME777 wrote...
And then the second you get to Kirkwall, again straight into the action.

That's the demo. It doesn't happen exactly as that in the real game. Didn't you notice pherhaps that there's a non-engine cinematic introducting you to the Isabela portion? How come you are so observant of what you want to notice and so blind to whom you don't care or don't want to see?

KLUME777 wrote...
Why does it have to be so fast paced, and why does everyone have to jump around like there on speed (How is it Possible for Varric to do that massive backflip). 

So, all this introduction just to say, in reality, this. Be real, this is the only thing that bothers you, the rest was just done as way to mask the real issue with something that in the appearance wouldn't be equal to all the other complaints.

There's nothing wrong on the technical side on those things you mention. You can not like them, but it would only be a matter of taste.

So "Why?", do you ask. Because there's nothing wrong with it objectively? Because maybe they wanted to try something different and achieve something different? Does this remove complexity? No, it does not. Does it "dumbs down" gameplay anyway? No, it doesnt. So, apart your taste and what you consider you like or don't like (that anyway I bet how much do you want that's only because you have to not like it) what there is for you to ask: "Why?".

KLUME777 wrote...
I find it hard for the DA2 world to be believable, why do the darkspawn jump around like those monkey things from the Wizard of Oz, Varric's Arrow sky volley ability looks like it belongs to Ratchet and Clank. DAO was extremely believable, it was done in a believable manner, it was real. DA2 is not.

I find more hard to see that people as you insist to judge things objectively when they then relate only about opinions as if they were the same. The two are different things, you know.

KLUME777 wrote...
So far, the DA2 demo has shown nothing that made me fall in love with DAO so im a really dissapointed with it, Bioware.

Good. Don't buy the game, then. Just please don't say "this sucks" or something like that because to do so you would need some objective parameter to base your judgment upon.

KLUME777 wrote...
There are many other faults, but im too tired too list them all.

See? This is an objective judgement. When you talk about facts then you are expressing a judgment based on objective things that, for you and your knowledge, are faulted. Problem with this behaviour is that you need to have, in fact, knowledge of what you talk about to have the possibility to judge fairly. Since many of you complainers obviously lack that basic thing many of your judgments have no much value.

KLUME777 wrote..
I will still get it (i have Sig edition), but my older brother has already canceled his Pre-Order.

Good to know. Why should others care on way or another? It should be that a sort of veiled threat of what is to come? ZZZzzzzZZZzzz.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mars 2011 - 10:29 .

[ToJKa1]

LPPrince wrote...
Usually, it goes like this-

New gamer to a series-"Oh, this is cool, and so is this, but this is LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it PLOX"

Old gamer to a series-"Okay, this is still good, this is still here, nice nice nice WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WHAT? LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it back PLOX"

Developing a succesful game is about striking a balance between "They changed it, now it sucks" and "It's the same, now it sucks" crowds. But don't be too succesful, as there is the "It's popular, now it sucks" crowd too

[Amioran]

ToJKa1 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
Usually, it goes like this-

New gamer to a series-"Oh, this is cool, and so is this, but this is LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it PLOX"

Old gamer to a series-"Okay, this is still good, this is still here, nice nice nice WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WHAT? LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it back PLOX"

Developing a succesful game is about striking a balance between "They changed it, now it sucks" and "It's the same, now it sucks" crowds. But don't be too succesful, as there is the "It's popular, now it sucks" crowd too

However if you don't exceed at last once you will never know what it is "too much" (assuming it really exists a "too much", but this is too complex to debate here).

Achieving balance is an hard thing, it is not only composed by "keeping back". If you only try to not go over, to contain, you will never achieve it. Excess is as fundamental to balance as it is control.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mars 2011 - 10:32 .

[Skyweir]

Amioran wrote...
...snip

Are you then of the opinon (heh..) that art cannot be judged? That a Van Gogh and the drawings of a three year old are of the same quality, because such comparisson is a matter of opinon?

How would you evalute a game at all then? Or anything, for that matter. Even so called "objective" facts are matters of scientific consensus based on subjective observations, and change as we understand more of the subject matter. This does not hinder us in making judgments on them.

Just so with opinon on this game. One can make judgments about it's quality, but one must introduce a scale of quality frist, that people can compare it too.  Many people on this forum for instance, holds games like Planescape: Torment and Baldur's Gate (2) as pinnacles of RPGs. How well does DA2 compare to these, or to other well designed RPGs (like it's prequal)? That is an "objective", mesurable quality of the game. Now, it might be that you might want to use an other scale to measure the quality, perhaps comparing the game to God of War. Undoutly you would come to a different conclusion if that is your standard. But both are valid, and "objective", ways to measure quality.


I find it puzzeling that people are so against the idea of judging the game from the demo. Most people here seems to have judged DA2 already, either positively or negatively.
What have you used to get to this judgment, if not the demo? All other information about the game is purely descriptive and second (or even thrid) hand. Only the demo can be experienced, and an opinion formed from it is much more credible than one formed from just reading press releases and hoping for the best/worst.

[moilami]

ToJKa1 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
Usually, it goes like this-

New gamer to a series-"Oh, this is cool, and so is this, but this is LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it PLOX"

Old gamer to a series-"Okay, this is still good, this is still here, nice nice nice WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WHAT? LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it back PLOX"

Developing a succesful game is about striking a balance between "They changed it, now it sucks" and "It's the same, now it sucks" crowds. But don't be too succesful, as there is the "It's popular, now it sucks" crowd too

Being a gamer is about cherry picking the best of the genres interested, and at times picking from el cheapo bin games for a change and what you never had time to play.

What would be the best action adventure, I wonder.

[Skyweir]

Amioran wrote...

ToJKa1 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
Usually, it goes like this-

New gamer to a series-"Oh, this is cool, and so is this, but this is LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it PLOX"

Old gamer to a series-"Okay, this is still good, this is still here, nice nice nice WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WHAT? LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME change it back PLOX"

Developing a succesful game is about striking a balance between "They changed it, now it sucks" and "It's the same, now it sucks" crowds. But don't be too succesful, as there is the "It's popular, now it sucks" crowd too

However if you don't exceed at last once you will never know what it is "too much" (assuming it really exists a "too much", but this is too complex to debate here).

Achieving balance is an hard thing, it is not only composed by "keeping back". If you only try to not go over, to contain, you will never achieve it. Excess is as fundamental to balance as it is control.

I would argue they already did the excess in Mass Effect 2.
However, I approve of this method. Very experimentaly sound.

Yet they should include some kind of control... a very bland game, perhaps? To weed out the people that always complain, the "false negative/postive" if you will.

[Amioran]

Skyweir wrote...

Are you then of the opinon (heh..) that art cannot be judged? That a Van Gogh and the drawings of a three year old are of the same quality, because such comparisson is a matter of opinon?

I'm saying exactly the contrary, in fact, I don't know what you have read (it can naturally be also that I expressed myself badly, given my not "perfect" - to use an euphemism ;-) - control of the english language). I'm saying that to judge things you must have knowledge of what you talk about or you just expel air from the mouth.

You see, it's not me that express judgments to let them pass as opinions. If I say that something "sucks" I know that's not an opinion but a judgment, and a judgment should be based on objective parameters. Since many of those judgments here are done by people that, for what I can see on what they say, know very little on the matter they are insisting on criticizing upon, I consider them as having as much value as someone that neither knows the difference from Caravaggio and Tintoretto and yet insist on talking about what it is supposedly "badly done" in their paintings.

As I said in another thread if you want to be an elitist (as many here consider themselves) then you have to abide to some "rules". A) You must be much more intelligent than the average guy, You must be extremely acknowledged about the thing you are nitpicking about, C) You must not be biased one way or another. Failing those "rules" then you just become a fool, or, at worst, pathetic. An example of a good elitist? Wilde or Baudelaire.  An example of a pathetic elitist? You have the luxury of choice.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mars 2011 - 11:11 .

[Vhaius]

I really hope there's some moment in the game of the Hawkes in Lothering, at the moment I feel nothing for any of them. On another note, I like the appearance of the world, and find the combat far more enjoyable.

[Amioran]

Skyweir wrote...

I would argue they already did the excess in Mass Effect 2.

The context was different.

Skyweir wrote...
Yet they should include some kind of control... a very bland game, perhaps? To weed out the people that always complain, the "false negative/postive" if you will.

Either if they will give exactly what people want or a "bland game" (as you put it, a sort of "basic experience" to have a point of start to balance reporst) they will either way have "false positive" results, that are either worser than complaints.

Sadly the truth is that "balancing" something as widespread as a game it's very difficult, because the remarks are usually done by people that are not real neither to themselves (meaning that many times they think to be experts when they obviously are not). This, in turns, make you have false reports and make constructive remarks lose their power. So, in reality, devs have to abide only to their personal experimentation, apart other sources that can be trusted by them.

[Skyweir]

Amioran wrote...

Skyweir wrote...

Are you then of the opinon (heh..) that art cannot be judged? That a Van Gogh and the drawings of a three year old are of the same quality, because such comparisson is a matter of opinon?

I'm saying exactly the contrary, in fact, I don't know what you have read. I'm saying that to judge things you must have knowledge of what you talk about or you just expel air from the mouth.

You see, it's not me that express judgments to let them pass as opinions. If I say that something "sucks" I know that's not an opinion but a judgment, and a judgment should be based on objective parameters. Since many of those judgments here are done by people that, for what I can see on what they say, know very little on the matter they are insisting on criticizing upon, I consider them as having as much value as someone that neither knows the difference from Caravaggio and Tintoretto and yet insist on talking about what it is supposedly "badly done" in their paintings.

As I said in another thread if you want to be an elitist (as many here consider themselves) then you have to abide to some "rules". A) You must be much more intelligent than the average guy, You must be extremely acknowledged about the thing you are nitpicking about, C) You must not be biased one way or another. Failing those "rules" then you just become a fool, or, at worst, pathetic. An example of a good elitist? Wilde or Baudelaire.  An example of a pathetic elitist? You have the luxury of choice.

There is no such thing as an unbiased person.

And this must hold both ways. Many people claim that the game is great in these threads, yet their opinon is as unfounded as the rest of us.

I agree that knowledge of a subject is crucial to judge it, but I would also argue that a depth of experience in the RPG genre would qualify many people on these forums to critique Dragon Age 2 based on the available information.
As I said, as true "objective" knowledge about what constiute the perfect computer RPG still eludes us, as long as we make clear what kind of measure or standard we use for our judgment, many people here are qualified to make judgments upon this game.

[AkiKishi]

I miss the speed a bit. But the slower speed makes using tactics feel more natural than it does in DA2. Other than that, DA all the way.