237 réponses à ce sujet

[GunClubGirl]

I'm tired of hearing about how console gamers "prefer" action games, button mashing, or hack n slash. The media needs to stop telling us what we want. Origins was the best game I've ever played, and I played it on my PS3, and I'm a so-called "console gamer". These changes from Origins are not for "the console gamer". I'm so sick of the stereotype.

[HawXV2]

Darji wrote...

F4d3s wrote...


well i cannot agree with everything in that article but i cannot deny that based on the demo and known game statistics (length of play, dialogue, more visuals rather than deeper gameplay etc), new combat mechanics/animations, etc, lack of in depth personalization, various class playability, and so on, Bioware/EA are definitely trying to make the game have more commercial appeal and cater to more of the masses and perhaps console gamers. Whether or not the actual game is victim to this remains to be seen and I will withhold final judgement until I play the game. 

Bottom line is, billion dollar companies such as EA and perhaps Bioware are out to make the most profits and they will be loyal to their board before they are loyal to their fans. Have run my own company, I get it and I would probably do the same..

Of course but this is a great chance. People aare starving for a real tactival old school RPG  like  experience. And thats why the Witcher 2 is so popular these days. Yes the combat is also action oriented which isnt that bead becaused its not a party based game but all the other stuff is much much more old school and RPG like than anything out there at the moment.

And clrealy it shows that this kind of thinking is not bad at all. It will succeed the 1.5 million from the Witcher by far. And thats on the PC alone.

1. The same ones that complain, huh?
2. Your comment about TW2 made me laugh heartily.

[Vicious]

QQ

This is a Witcher 2 is great thread.

Modifié par Vicious, 03 mars 2011 - 01:23 .

[Anathemic]

DocSun wrote...

Pcrews wrote...

Ugh I hate these threads. EVERYTHING CHANGES OVER TIME. IF ALL RPG's STUCK TO THE "classIC" FORMULA THAN THEY WOULD ALL BE THE SAME AND PEOPLE WOULD B*TCH ABOUT THAT INSTEAD.

As for ME2 being dumbed down. Most of the talents in the talent trees in ME1 overlapped each other and were just filler more than anything. ME2 just got rid of the useless talents like WOW in cataclysm. Think of it as trimming the fat off a slab of beef. It was not needed.

Lets play classic rpgs where every game is a dungeon crawler and ohhhhh, let's all have random trun based battles and grind for 5+ hours in each area just to be strong enough to take out the next boss. It's soooooo much fun, why did they get rid of that.

As much as you people complain you will buy the game, love it, beat it, than come back to the forums and complain more. Life goes on.

So much truth here... Also I have been taking names of people who say they will never play, dont support or canceled their preorders ... I garentee 90% of those names will have the game regestered within 2 days of release. If they really cared they would vote with their money and not buy it at all... however they have no bite to their bark and will cave and just deal. All they want to do is just complain and moan

Sure I'll get DA2... when I get my money's worth on the Ultimate Edition.

[Darji]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

r2dr wrote...

thesilverlinedviking wrote...

I remember BioWare saying that Dragon Age Origins was supposed to play like the old-school RPGs. I don't remember them ever saying that Dragon Age II was supposed to play like them to.

If in making a sequel you're going to re-genre a game, change it's visual style, game play and setting, then you've got to think long and hard whether you should be calling this ship of theseus you're making a sequel, or whether perhaps starting a new franchise would be better.

It is still an RPG. and the setting is still in the world of DA. also the combat still has alot of familiar elements. So i dont think a change in visual style constitutes creating a new franchise

A Sequel should normall have more features and even more complexity and content instead of less.

[Riloux]

It absolutely does not have the same feel as DA:O. It couldn't feel more different. The art style is different, the interactions are different, the combat is entirely uncharacteristic of a proper RPG.

There was nothing wrong with old school RPGs. Complexity is not something that should be seen as an impediment to fun. Unfortunately, complexity no longer has a place in our society where people have gnat-like attention spans. We're in the age of passive entertainment.

[DTKT]

Darji wrote...

DTKT wrote...

Darji wrote...

F4d3s wrote...


well i cannot agree with everything in that article but i cannot deny that based on the demo and known game statistics (length of play, dialogue, more visuals rather than deeper gameplay etc), new combat mechanics/animations, etc, lack of in depth personalization, various class playability, and so on, Bioware/EA are definitely trying to make the game have more commercial appeal and cater to more of the masses and perhaps console gamers. Whether or not the actual game is victim to this remains to be seen and I will withhold final judgement until I play the game. 

Bottom line is, billion dollar companies such as EA and perhaps Bioware are out to make the most profits and they will be loyal to their board before they are loyal to their fans. Have run my own company, I get it and I would probably do the same..

Of course but this is a great chance. People aare starving for a real tactival old school RPG  like  experience. And thats why the Witcher 2 is so popular these days. Yes the combat is also action oriented which isnt that bead becaused its not a party based game but all the other stuff is much much more old school and RPG like than anything out there at the moment.

And clrealy it shows that this kind of thinking is not bad at all. It will succeed the 1.5 million from the Witcher by far. And thats on the PC alone.

Please elaborate because honestly, the Witcher 2 is probably the least old school RPG game if I take into consideration the complain of the "old-timers" with DAII.

Ok i will try it and compare it to Baldurs Gate 2. Without mentioning the combatsystem.

First of all the World  itself. Baldurs gates world felt alive it was very very detailed and atmospheric. The same goes for the Witcher 2. They really cared about the world itself. You cant reach every part of the game in one playthrough for example. Or its very open world like in the chapters itself and its only restricted to stronger monsters you just cant beat. Now look at Dragon Age 2: Corridor level, lifeless and no details at all. It looks sterile and souless. Yes even Kirkwall. I posted a video of Kirwall in the day already.

Secondly the depth of the dialoguesystem: Yes its mostly paraphfrased too but still you see another level of detail in these conversations. Its not the good or bad or rival and Friend think . ITs not black and white like in Dragon Age 2. ITs much darker overall yes but the same goes for Baldurs gate.

Next the whole system of crafting, equipment mentionment etc. Every bit of it was cutted out in Dragon Age 2 while you still have all this in a deepsystem in the Witcher 2.

And finally its about the communication with the community itself. Instead like Bioware who almost irgnores everything Origins fans said CD Project listend very carefully to the community. They really cared about the game and the people who will play it. Bioware just rushed it out in less than 2 years. With much repetiotion, and the same areas over and over again. aldurs Gate was a craftmanshio compared to Dragon Age 2. It wasnt rushed the whole series was carefully crafted. Just like the World in The witcher 2.

And thats why old school gamers and RPG fans are much more interested in The witcher instead of Dragon Age 2.

I will judge how "alive" the world is when I will have actually played the game. Some context always help instead of seeing some random video. 

We know nothing of the Crafting system in DAII, at least, I don't. 

The dialogue system is fine. I enjoy playing a Paladin. Black and white versions works for me.

I'll take these complaints about game mechanics seriously when the game comes out and someone will have personnaly played 40 hours of content. Till then, you are just speculating over tid bits of information.

How about Witcher 2 and DAII are both RPG but different? Yeah, that sounds about right.

Modifié par DTKT, 03 mars 2011 - 01:25 .

[Vicious]

Play pen and paper.

Or The Witcher 2, as I believe that was the point of your OP.

[Beerfish]

How a game is 'classified' by others means zero to me. Do I enjoy the game or not is all that matters. Games will NEVER be exactly the way I would like them to be so the most important is if the company in this case BioWare does what I like best about their games. Reasonable story and very very good companions.

[zazei]

Darji wrote...

zazei wrote...



While this is getting terribly off-topic I would love a Bloodlines 2. Bioware please do a Vampire RPG! 

Why do you want to destroy such a great series? Give it to obsidion they are at the moment the best company for  deep RPGs and good writing.  I am really interested to see what they are doing with Icewind dale 3^^

My mistake. Of course Obsidian should do it. And they are making Icewind dale 3? I had no idea.

[r2dr]

dreamextractor wrote...

r2dr wrote...

thesilverlinedviking wrote...

I remember BioWare saying that Dragon Age Origins was supposed to play like the old-school RPGs. I don't remember them ever saying that Dragon Age II was supposed to play like them to.

If in making a sequel you're going to re-genre a game, change it's visual style, game play and setting, then you've got to think long and hard whether you should be calling this ship of theseus you're making a sequel, or whether perhaps starting a new franchise would be better.

Why would they do that, when they have a perfectly good universe to add additional story and lore to?

<_<

Well, they can set it in the same universe, but should call it something else to reflect that they're no longer making a Dragon Age game.

[wolfsite]

How about we all just relax, wait for the game to actually be released and actually play it properly beginning to end, then form an opinion.

[coolide]

Consoles rule. PCs drool.

[Blastback]

GunClubGirl wrote...

I'm tired of hearing about how console gamers "prefer" action games, button mashing, or hack n slash. The media needs to stop telling us what we want. Origins was the best game I've ever played, and I played it on my PS3, and I'm a so-called "console gamer". These changes from Origins are not for "the console gamer". I'm so sick of the stereotype.

Yeah, I play on both PC and consoles, and love both.  And I love the hardcore RPGs as much as most anyone. 

Whatever happened to being just a gamer?

[Anathemic]

AustinKain wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

AustinKain wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

HyperLimited wrote...

I'm starting to lose any and all respect for the "old school" crowd when they negatively parade around like this. Never forget what the classics have brought us today, but don't be stuck in the past. Change is a part of life. Face it, embrace it, and move on, or be left in the dust. 

Final Fantasy XIII would like to have a word with you.

I'm not part of any 'old school' crowd, though I do agree with the article when it states "why fix it when it ain't broke?" (paraphrased of course).

 
Because they were copying off of D&D and thier own BG series, and wanted to create their own world/lore/rules etc..

When did using a simple base formula equate to no innovation?

I am not saying that. Go back and look at all the pre DA:O press and  you will see the spiritual succesor to BG line alot.  Then go on to say that in the future they want to get away from that and go on thier own direction.

The problem is that there are so many gamers that dont like change that when we got the old school rpg we went into nostalga mode. Now that the second part to thier plan is in effect we all forget what they said 2 years ago, and complain that they are doing excalty what they said they were going to do.

Wasn't there for pre-DA:O, I joiend the forums some time after

Anyways I partially agree with your statement. If what you stated is true, BioWare did notify their fanbase of the change. However, this does not warrant "screw you guys we are going with this plan and you ain't gonna stop us!"

[Darji]

zazei wrote...

Darji wrote...

zazei wrote...



While this is getting terribly off-topic I would love a Bloodlines 2. Bioware please do a Vampire RPG! 

Why do you want to destroy such a great series? Give it to obsidion they are at the moment the best company for  deep RPGs and good writing.  I am really interested to see what they are doing with Icewind dale 3^^

My mistake. Of course Obsidian should do it. And they are making Icewind dale 3? I had no idea.

Yeah they are on it but no infos so far^^

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Anathemic wrote...

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Half_Moon wrote...

Wait, these guys played the demo? That's the sum of their experience with the game? All the other major online reviewers had people spending 5 hours on the full game at Bioware headquarters.

Seriously, in the demo, we had our inventories locked. What kind of game website passes judgement on a game after reviewing the demo?

Buddy, y'know the purpose of a demo is to judge right? It's been done many times, demos are released to let the players judge on whether they want the game or not.

Judging whether or not you like certain mechanics in a game is different then writing an editorial stating/implying that Bioware sold out and DA2 is part of the downfall of RPGs for the old school.

Again that's the purpose of a demo, to let players generate an opinion by risking a hands-on experience with the game. Sure you can't judge story elements and whatnot, but you can judge basic gameplay system.

Ever wonder why Bethesda doesn't do demos?
Ever wonder why Blizzard does do demos?

It's a risk, on one hand you get reviews and critiques to generate a current of postitivity the other hand you have the chance to lose sales and whatnot.

i know there are pros and cons. but im pretty sure that people can agree the opinions that the writers jumped to are extreme and going out on a limb given the brief amount of time.

[Narrsan]

Vicious wrote...

QQ

This is a Zork was better than DAO/The Witcher thread.

Damn right.

[Vicious]

IBTL

Also consoles are better and Bioware would be wise to cater to them in the future. PCGaming is nerdy, console gaming is social.

Also DA3 with multiplayer features please.


*waits*

Modifié par Vicious, 03 mars 2011 - 01:27 .

[Yrkoon]

Darji wrote...

www.hookedgamers.com/editorials/2011/03/02/dragon_age_ii_the_decline_of_the_classic_rpg.html

But people should read the rest too.

My god, the amount of grade-school level stupid in this article is massive.

First off, they keep  tossing around the term "classic RPG" without bothering to explain to us what  exactly they mean.... except for once, when they say this:

The first evidence of a departure from Origins in Dragon Age 2 is located within the character creation tools. Quite simply you cannot create your own character as such; you merely customise a pre-set character. Granted, you can choose your own class, first name and the options for customisation of the character may be fairly detailed but the main character comes with its own, predetermined race, identity and history. This class-based character creation is usually associated more with Action-RPGs rather than classic RPGs and is our first clue that Dragon Age has shifted towards action.

You can't create your own character in Planescape: Torment, either.  In fact, you can't  choose your own  gender,  either, or name, or even customize your appearance.

Yet Torment is universally labled as a classic RPG in every sense of the term.


Also:

As far as the dialogue scenes are concerned, this is not role playing; this is interactive playing. The dialogue is so simple that it could be replaced by a choice that you make at the beginning of the game: "Do you want to be a compassionate, humorous, or obnoxious character?" After that choice, you would only have to watch the dialogue scenes play through with no player-input at all.

Er... this so-called lack of choice in dialogue is even more glaring in the BG series.  BG1 didn't even HAVE dialogue cut scenes.  They  flat out  didn't exist.   If you wanted to "role-play" that aspect of the game, you had to imagine its existance, because it.... was't there.


<gag>

Forget the death of RPGs.  Right now I'm lamenting the death of decent journalism, and well thought-out editorials. 

Modifié par Yrkoon, 03 mars 2011 - 01:30 .

[Merced652]

Anathemic wrote...

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Half_Moon wrote...

Wait, these guys played the demo? That's the sum of their experience with the game? All the other major online reviewers had people spending 5 hours on the full game at Bioware headquarters.

Seriously, in the demo, we had our inventories locked. What kind of game website passes judgement on a game after reviewing the demo?

Buddy, y'know the purpose of a demo is to judge right? It's been done many times, demos are released to let the players judge on whether they want the game or not.

Judging whether or not you like certain mechanics in a game is different then writing an editorial stating/implying that Bioware sold out and DA2 is part of the downfall of RPGs for the old school.

Again that's the purpose of a demo, to let players generate an opinion by risking a hands-on experience with the game. Sure you can't judge story elements and whatnot, but you can judge basic gameplay system.

Ever wonder why Bethesda doesn't do demos?
Ever wonder why Blizzard does do demos?

It's a risk, on one hand you get reviews and critiques to generate a current of postitivity the other hand you have the chance to lose sales and whatnot.

Niether of them do demos because you know what you're getting, not because its a risk. Everyone knew sc2 was going to be a RTS, everyone knows d3 will be a hack & slash dungeon crawl, no pandering to consoles required.

[KallDay]

Are niche grit and mass market appeal exclusive?  /zen

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

r2dr wrote...

dreamextractor wrote...

r2dr wrote...

thesilverlinedviking wrote...

I remember BioWare saying that Dragon Age Origins was supposed to play like the old-school RPGs. I don't remember them ever saying that Dragon Age II was supposed to play like them to.

If in making a sequel you're going to re-genre a game, change it's visual style, game play and setting, then you've got to think long and hard whether you should be calling this ship of theseus you're making a sequel, or whether perhaps starting a new franchise would be better.

Why would they do that, when they have a perfectly good universe to add additional story and lore to?

<_<

Well, they can set it in the same universe, but should call it something else to reflect that they're no longer making a Dragon Age game.

they did. Origins was dropped.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Darji wrote...

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

r2dr wrote...

thesilverlinedviking wrote...

I remember BioWare saying that Dragon Age Origins was supposed to play like the old-school RPGs. I don't remember them ever saying that Dragon Age II was supposed to play like them to.

If in making a sequel you're going to re-genre a game, change it's visual style, game play and setting, then you've got to think long and hard whether you should be calling this ship of theseus you're making a sequel, or whether perhaps starting a new franchise would be better.

It is still an RPG. and the setting is still in the world of DA. also the combat still has alot of familiar elements. So i dont think a change in visual style constitutes creating a new franchise

A Sequel should normall have more features and even more complexity and content instead of less.

they also need to refine and get rid of the unneccesary. and there was alot of unneccesary elements of origins.