139 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr. Gerbz]

"We're taking RPGs to the next level."

No, you're taking action games to the next level. Sadly you're actually de-evolving RPG's.

Why can't you try to evolve both? Give us great combat, with a lot of customization? I understand you want the CoD mass to buy your games too, but that's easily solved by giving people options in the options menu like 'remove all dialogue' or 'automate every single RPG aspect'.

Us true gamers prefer our RPG's to be long, and full of customization, not to mention no DLC before the game is actually released, as that should be free in the complete game.

[Glorfindel709]

I am a Console Gamer that does not have a PC really capable of playing games that came out after Diablo 2. So obviously, most of my gaming is done on the console (Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2, etc etc) and Bioware has always been my top gaming company because they introduced me to RPGs with KotOR 1 as my first xbox game (never was a big gamer before this point). Fell in love immediately - this was my character, I could make him whoever I wanted him to be - the roguish badass, the diplomatic good guy, or evil "for the lulz". I especially enjoyed the more text based ones (as in, I pick a sentence of dialogue as what my character says. I know exactly what my character said, how it sounded in my mind, the tone etc etc).

After that, I started branching out into other RPG games and it rapidly became my favorite genre. And Bioware made three of my favorites (Dragon Age, KotOR, and Baldurs Gate[played on my friends computer]) The came Mass Effect.. I tried, I really did. But the Dialogue Wheel ("No" ended up voiced as "Go to hell" or the equivalent so many times...) and the voiced PC kind of screwed the immersion for me. I didnt think of it as my Spectre, me making the decisions and driving the story. I just kept thinking of it as Shepard, like I was playing a Halo game where I had dialogue and story options for Master Chief. Regardless, Mass Effect had a driving story and compelling characters, what I had come to expect and love from Bioware. I could live with that

I can live with the ridiculously fast combat speed and a man who is swinging a 2h sword around like it's a pool noodle. I can live with not being able to talk with my companions anywhere like I got to in DA:O, even though I felt that it added a depth to the character and made me feel like we were actually out questing across Ferelden rather than the random people who follow me around in battle making witty rejoinders (ala Awakening). I can even live with not being able to choose a fantastical race in a fantasy world and accept that I'm playing as a Human.

But what I cannot accept is being told that because I enjoy dialogue trees, a more moderate combat speed, and the ability to play as an elf in a fantasy world I'm some sort of hateful spiteful fringe gamer who deserves to be marginalized and spammed with hatred every time I give my opinion on the new direction the intellectual property that I enjoy so much has taken.

I'm going to play Dragon Age 2, and I know that I'm going to have a compelling story with deep characters and choices that will have echoing effects on the world around me. But it's not going to be like playing my very own Revan or Warden. Based on the demo, I sincerely doubt that I'm going to feel like I've been transported from my room and that I'm in Ferelden as the son of a noble house or a wielder of magic and a harbinger of fear , where the choices I make are more real than anything else and the grouping of pixels that travel with me are my friends. I'm going to be the guy on the other side of the screen in a drab apartment selecting dialogue options based on an icon and three words leading to a soliloquy and spamming the attack button until everyone is dead.

*shrugs*

[Ignoble Fat Man]

LdyShayna wrote...

Respectfully, I know how combat feels to me - too frantic and fundamentally unfun, even with pause and play.  I could over-look even that, however, but I alao know how I feel about the dialog wheel.  And yes, I noticed the changes from Mass Effect.  More experience with it is not going to warm me to it.

These are changes that I have thought about a great deal, and just do not like.  Of course, if I don't like it, it can't be because my preferences lie elsewhere. Noooo...must be because I irrationally hate change. 

Bah.

Yes, I do feel marginalized, but I've always acknowledged that my tastes are not shared by a majority of consumers.  This does not, however, make my objections and tastes ipso facto irrational.

I guess maybe you should get the idea that the majority of people like the faster paced combat.  Even the majority of hardcore RPG fans of which I am one.  It may be irritating but slow plodding RPGs are really not much fun.  If you want slower combat feel I suggest going to turn based RPG systems.

The dialogue wheel is kind of lame but I can understand the need for cross platform development.  Do I wish they would have designed this game solely around PC users....YES, but I know they need to make money too and still think I'll have a blast playing it.

[Cucco]

Here is what I don't get, and I don't see many other posters discussing this: when Gaider, or any rpg developer talks about "stats being thrown at you" or wanting to make games more accessible, there is a clear discrepancy with reality.

I'm going to assume that a lot of Baldur's Gate fans (or even any other Bioware game after) had their first encounter with the game, and the mechanic, at a very young age (such as myself). As in, between the ages of 8 and 14 (let's say). For the hell of it, let's throw in anyone who ever played games like Pokemon (as embarrassing as it is to some), and we will assume that they, also, began playing said games at a very young age.

I think you may see where I am going with this...

Is it not fair to say that there is nothing ultimately confusing, difficult, or complex about D & D style games if most of the fans of RPGs learned and enjoyed them before they even got to highschool?

Is the enhancing function of simple statistics like "strength" and "charisma" so hard to grasp to the people who have not played these games before (or very much)? I don't think so, and as a matter of fact it seems pretty condescending to say that the general public can't deal with "numbers being thrown at them."

I mean is it really an issue that terms like "hp" are used in a world full of games with healthbars?

Does the tactical view throw the common person off? Are they bewildered when they see characters from a certain distance away?

I try not to be sarcastic when I post, but I can't help but try to emphasize how absurd the idea of accessibility is. The bottom line is, there are people who enjoy fantasy games and narratives, and there are people who don't. Maybe the problem with your average fps console gamer (which I could be considered one of) isn't that RPGs and D&D mechanics confuse them, but that they don't enjoy fantasy settings and stories.

There seems to me to be a contradiction in Bioware touting that it's narratives and characters are complex, multi-layered and thematic when it states that it wants its games to be accessible.to the wider swathe of gamers who may just not be interested at all in fighting dragons.

Though I can't understand why they wouldn't be

[moilami]

Ignoble Fat Man wrote...

LdyShayna wrote...

Respectfully, I know how combat feels to me - too frantic and fundamentally unfun, even with pause and play.  I could over-look even that, however, but I alao know how I feel about the dialog wheel.  And yes, I noticed the changes from Mass Effect.  More experience with it is not going to warm me to it.

These are changes that I have thought about a great deal, and just do not like.  Of course, if I don't like it, it can't be because my preferences lie elsewhere. Noooo...must be because I irrationally hate change. 

Bah.

Yes, I do feel marginalized, but I've always acknowledged that my tastes are not shared by a majority of consumers.  This does not, however, make my objections and tastes ipso facto irrational.

I guess maybe you should get the idea that the majority of people like the faster paced combat.  Even the majority of hardcore RPG fans of which I am one.  It may be irritating but slow plodding RPGs are really not much fun.  If you want slower combat feel I suggest going to turn based RPG systems.

The dialogue wheel is kind of lame but I can understand the need for cross platform development.  Do I wish they would have designed this game solely around PC users....YES, but I know they need to make money too and still think I'll have a blast playing it.

Faster combat? Alright, I am pretty fine with it if it is WotlK Arena deadly. But if it is me only facerolling waves of trash mobs I don't really see the appeal. That said, I would still prefer slower combat with the need to ambush and trap monsters.

Epic fights take time. 

[Amioran]

moilami wrote...
That is bad, it seems. Better just have illusions of superiority by facerolling moronical trash mobs. Much better! True superiority is so evil and bad! And none wants to be elite!

So you are "elite"...

Excuse me if I laugh out my pants while you say so. But you know, with words all are "elites", problems arises when facts are near, then these "elites" all dissapear. Case in point the fact that you are still there, making the part of the fool without either realising it. Where's your superiority on this? Dissapeared, as stated.

Just a little advice: beware to whom you say this, someone could take you on your words and then you will have trouble, real trouble. You never know when you have to prove who you really are.

Modifié par Amioran, 03 mars 2011 - 11:45 .

[Ignoble Fat Man]

moilami wrote...

Faster combat? Alright, I am pretty fine with it if it is WotlK Arena deadly. But if it is me only facerolling waves of trash mobs I don't really see the appeal. That said, I would still prefer slower combat with the need to ambush and trap monsters.

Epic fights take time. 

I meant quicker strikes and generally a higher pace to whatever combat you are doing.  It was an interesting article though some of the questions of why the game changed were odd to ask of a writer.  Its not like he developed code for the game just the story and how it plays out.

[Maconbar]

Cucco wrote...

Here is what I don't get, and I don't see many other posters discussing this: when Gaider, or any rpg developer talks about "stats being thrown at you" or wanting to make games more accessible, there is a clear discrepancy with reality.

I'm going to assume that a lot of Baldur's Gate fans (or even any other Bioware game after) had their first encounter with the game, and the mechanic, at a very young age (such as myself). As in, between the ages of 8 and 14 (let's say). For the hell of it, let's throw in anyone who ever played games like Pokemon (as embarrassing as it is to some), and we will assume that they, also, began playing said games at a very young age.

I think you may see where I am going with this...

Is it not fair to say that there is nothing ultimately confusing, difficult, or complex about D & D style games if most of the fans of RPGs learned and enjoyed them before they even got to highschool?

Is the enhancing function of simple statistics like "strength" and "charisma" so hard to grasp to the people who have not played these games before (or very much)? I don't think so, and as a matter of fact it seems pretty condescending to say that the general public can't deal with "numbers being thrown at them."

I mean is it really an issue that terms like "hp" are used in a world full of games with healthbars?

Does the tactical view throw the common person off? Are they bewildered when they see characters from a certain distance away?

I try not to be sarcastic when I post, but I can't help but try to emphasize how absurd the idea of accessibility is. The bottom line is, there are people who enjoy fantasy games and narratives, and there are people who don't. Maybe the problem with your average fps console gamer (which I could be considered one of) isn't that RPGs and D&D mechanics confuse them, but that they don't enjoy fantasy settings and stories.

There seems to me to be a contradiction in Bioware touting that it's narratives and characters are complex, multi-layered and thematic when it states that it wants its games to be accessible.to the wider swathe of gamers who may just not be interested at all in fighting dragons.

Though I can't understand why they wouldn't be

What if you are a potential fan that likes the fantasy genre but hasn't yet played AD&D or something similar? You can't say that they won't be interested in fighting dragons. You seem to be proposing that BW shouldn't bother to go after people that haven't played RPGs before.

[Cucco]

I'd also like to point out the contradiction in Mike Laidlaw saying that newcomers should love DA since most of the games they already play use D&D mechanics (sports games with stats, shooters with leveling, etc.), yet apparently those very mechanics are too scary for people who haven't tried DA and other RPGs yet, so they need to soften them. Again, as they say "you won't be able to please everyone" when it comes to trying to get them to enjoy fantasy narratives they simply have no interest in.

[Cucco]

Maconbar wrote...

Cucco wrote...

Here is what I don't get, and I don't see many other posters discussing this: when Gaider, or any rpg developer talks about "stats being thrown at you" or wanting to make games more accessible, there is a clear discrepancy with reality.

I'm going to assume that a lot of Baldur's Gate fans (or even any other Bioware game after) had their first encounter with the game, and the mechanic, at a very young age (such as myself). As in, between the ages of 8 and 14 (let's say). For the hell of it, let's throw in anyone who ever played games like Pokemon (as embarrassing as it is to some), and we will assume that they, also, began playing said games at a very young age.

I think you may see where I am going with this...

Is it not fair to say that there is nothing ultimately confusing, difficult, or complex about D & D style games if most of the fans of RPGs learned and enjoyed them before they even got to highschool?

Is the enhancing function of simple statistics like "strength" and "charisma" so hard to grasp to the people who have not played these games before (or very much)? I don't think so, and as a matter of fact it seems pretty condescending to say that the general public can't deal with "numbers being thrown at them."

I mean is it really an issue that terms like "hp" are used in a world full of games with healthbars?

Does the tactical view throw the common person off? Are they bewildered when they see characters from a certain distance away?

I try not to be sarcastic when I post, but I can't help but try to emphasize how absurd the idea of accessibility is. The bottom line is, there are people who enjoy fantasy games and narratives, and there are people who don't. Maybe the problem with your average fps console gamer (which I could be considered one of) isn't that RPGs and D&D mechanics confuse them, but that they don't enjoy fantasy settings and stories.

There seems to me to be a contradiction in Bioware touting that it's narratives and characters are complex, multi-layered and thematic when it states that it wants its games to be accessible.to the wider swathe of gamers who may just not be interested at all in fighting dragons.

Though I can't understand why they wouldn't be

What if you are a potential fan that likes the fantasy genre but hasn't yet played AD&D or something similar? You can't say that they won't be interested in fighting dragons. You seem to be proposing that BW shouldn't bother to go after people that haven't played RPGs before.

No no, what I'm saying is the "rpg" aspect of the genre is not what is stopping people from playing.  I would assume that your example is rare if not non-existent - though of course I could be wrong.  I would assume that someone who enjoys fantasy narratives would look at DA and games like it as something they'd like to try.  Just like other Mass Effect gamers say they tried out Knights of the Old Republic because they were fans of Star Wars even though they were RPG virgins.

[Cucco]

@ Maconbar, I'm wondering if I accidentally made my point convoluted in my first post. Simply put: There are no real issues with accessibility when it comes to the mechanics of RPGs - that is a myth since everyone either plays them through other genres, or is simply above the mental capacity of an eight year old and thereby able to comprehend them. Therefore, people who don't like fantasy don't play fantasy games, Bioware would have to make people WANT to fight dragons that didn't already have the attraction to doing so, just like you're not going to enjoy Mass Effect unless you found the sci fi genre interesting.

[Maconbar]

Cucco wrote...

Maconbar wrote...

What if you are a potential fan that likes the fantasy genre but hasn't yet played AD&D or something similar? You can't say that they won't be interested in fighting dragons. You seem to be proposing that BW shouldn't bother to go after people that haven't played RPGs before.

No no, what I'm saying is the "rpg" aspect of the genre is not what is stopping people from playing.  I would assume that your example is rare if not non-existent - though of course I could be wrong.  I would assume that someone who enjoys fantasy narratives would look at DA and games like it as something they'd like to try.  Just like other Mass Effect gamers say they tried out Knights of the Old Republic because they were fans of Star Wars even though they were RPG virgins.

I fully agree with your bolded statement. In fact I would say that Mass Effect 2 is an easier gateway to the rpg genre for first-timers than DA:O was. I work with lots of teenagers that love playing video games and love fantasy stories but they don't much like math and are weak in probability. What introduction to a new game is better suited to immediately engaging them? If they have never had to allocate stats or roll 3-d6 to determine their chars stats, giving them a relatively easy but fun tutorial is probably the better way to go. Hook their interest and than start to introduce core elements.

[Maconbar]

Cucco wrote...

@ Maconbar, I'm wondering if I accidentally made my point convoluted in my first post. Simply put: There are no real issues with accessibility when it comes to the mechanics of RPGs - that is a myth since everyone either plays them through other genres, or is simply above the mental capacity of an eight year old and thereby able to comprehend them. Therefore, people who don't like fantasy don't play fantasy games, Bioware would have to make people WANT to fight dragons that didn't already have the attraction to doing so, just like you're not going to enjoy Mass Effect unless you found the sci fi genre interesting.

How do you know that there are no real issues with accessibilty? BW certainly seems to think so.

[Cucco]

Maconbar wrote...

Cucco wrote...

Maconbar wrote...

What if you are a potential fan that likes the fantasy genre but hasn't yet played AD&D or something similar? You can't say that they won't be interested in fighting dragons. You seem to be proposing that BW shouldn't bother to go after people that haven't played RPGs before.

No no, what I'm saying is the "rpg" aspect of the genre is not what is stopping people from playing.  I would assume that your example is rare if not non-existent - though of course I could be wrong.  I would assume that someone who enjoys fantasy narratives would look at DA and games like it as something they'd like to try.  Just like other Mass Effect gamers say they tried out Knights of the Old Republic because they were fans of Star Wars even though they were RPG virgins.

I fully agree with your bolded statement. In fact I would say that Mass Effect 2 is an easier gateway to the rpg genre for first-timers than DA:O was. I work with lots of teenagers that love playing video games and love fantasy stories but they don't much like math and are weak in probability. What introduction to a new game is better suited to immediately engaging them? If they have never had to allocate stats or roll 3-d6 to determine their chars stats, giving them a relatively easy but fun tutorial is probably the better way to go. Hook their interest and than start to introduce core elements.

Oh yea, I have no qualms with the tutorial to
get things going, I am most concerned with the general argument on
Bioware's part regarding overall accessibility.  I took
Gaider's comment, along with a few others, as being directed towards
the other aspects of the game that have been altered - not just the fact
it has a short tutorial.  When he or others discuss how "hardcore" RPG fans cannot all be pleased, they seem to refer to the fact the game's mechanics must be changed to make it more accessible.  I just find that absurd.

Edit:  I actually enjoy the jumpstart tutorial section, and it works with the framed narrative so, fine by me.

Modifié par Cucco, 04 mars 2011 - 12:04 .

[Maconbar]

Cucco wrote...


Oh yea, I have no qualms with the tutorial to
get things going, I am most concerned with the general argument on
Bioware's part regarding overall accessibility.  I took
Gaider's comment, along with a few others, as being directed towards
the other aspects of the game that have been altered - not just the fact
it has a short tutorial.  When he or others discuss how "hardcore" RPG fans cannot all be pleased, they seem to refer to the fact the game's mechanics must be changed to make it more accessible.  I just find that absurd.

Edit:  I actually enjoy the jumpstart tutorial section, and it works with the framed narrative so, fine by me.

These points are all fair and reasonable.

[Qset]

Glorfindel709 wrote...

I am a Console Gamer that does not have a PC really capable of playing games that came out after Diablo 2. So obviously, most of my gaming is done on the console (Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2, etc etc) and Bioware has always been my top gaming company because they introduced me to RPGs with KotOR 1 as my first xbox game (never was a big gamer before this point). Fell in love immediately - this was my character, I could make him whoever I wanted him to be - the roguish badass, the diplomatic good guy, or evil "for the lulz". I especially enjoyed the more text based ones (as in, I pick a sentence of dialogue as what my character says. I know exactly what my character said, how it sounded in my mind, the tone etc etc).

After that, I started branching out into other RPG games and it rapidly became my favorite genre. And Bioware made three of my favorites (Dragon Age, KotOR, and Baldurs Gate[played on my friends computer]) The came Mass Effect.. I tried, I really did. But the Dialogue Wheel ("No" ended up voiced as "Go to hell" or the equivalent so many times...) and the voiced PC kind of screwed the immersion for me. I didnt think of it as my Spectre, me making the decisions and driving the story. I just kept thinking of it as Shepard, like I was playing a Halo game where I had dialogue and story options for Master Chief. Regardless, Mass Effect had a driving story and compelling characters, what I had come to expect and love from Bioware. I could live with that

I can live with the ridiculously fast combat speed and a man who is swinging a 2h sword around like it's a pool noodle. I can live with not being able to talk with my companions anywhere like I got to in DA:O, even though I felt that it added a depth to the character and made me feel like we were actually out questing across Ferelden rather than the random people who follow me around in battle making witty rejoinders (ala Awakening). I can even live with not being able to choose a fantastical race in a fantasy world and accept that I'm playing as a Human.

But what I cannot accept is being told that because I enjoy dialogue trees, a more moderate combat speed, and the ability to play as an elf in a fantasy world I'm some sort of hateful spiteful fringe gamer who deserves to be marginalized and spammed with hatred every time I give my opinion on the new direction the intellectual property that I enjoy so much has taken.

I'm going to play Dragon Age 2, and I know that I'm going to have a compelling story with deep characters and choices that will have echoing effects on the world around me. But it's not going to be like playing my very own Revan or Warden. Based on the demo, I sincerely doubt that I'm going to feel like I've been transported from my room and that I'm in Ferelden as the son of a noble house or a wielder of magic and a harbinger of fear , where the choices I make are more real than anything else and the grouping of pixels that travel with me are my friends. I'm going to be the guy on the other side of the screen in a drab apartment selecting dialogue options based on an icon and three words leading to a soliloquy and spamming the attack button until everyone is dead.

*shrugs*

excellent post +1.

[Cucco]

Maconbar wrote...

Cucco wrote...

@ Maconbar, I'm wondering if I accidentally made my point convoluted in my first post. Simply put: There are no real issues with accessibility when it comes to the mechanics of RPGs - that is a myth since everyone either plays them through other genres, or is simply above the mental capacity of an eight year old and thereby able to comprehend them. Therefore, people who don't like fantasy don't play fantasy games, Bioware would have to make people WANT to fight dragons that didn't already have the attraction to doing so, just like you're not going to enjoy Mass Effect unless you found the sci fi genre interesting.

How do you know that there are no real issues with accessibilty? BW certainly seems to think so.

Sorry, I'm jumping around responding to your comments backwards.

Well my argument is as follows:

- I would assume that the majority of RPG fans began their attachment to them as youngsters (pre-teens) like myself, and were fully capable of learning and enjoying the mechanics.  (Edit: So it is not really a question of people being scared of "stats" being thrown at them, since, given things like tutorials, it's pretty easy for the common gamer to get the hang of things)

- Bioware also (through Mr. Laidlaw in particular) has said that people should love RPGs because most of the other genres utilize the mechanics like: sports games with stats, tactical games like Starcraft, and fps with levelling up, etc.  So they are already basically a part of the larger gaming culture.

- Lastly, I would say that if I were to take a guess based on any other medium with fantasy narratives, I would say the people don't play fantasy RPGs first and foremost because they do not like fantasy narratives (by that I mean dragons, mages, sword wielding knights, etc.), just like they don't enjoy them in movies or books.

Modifié par Cucco, 04 mars 2011 - 12:14 .

[S Atomeha]

Alodar wrote...

QA with David Gaider


Alodar

cheers.

[Morroian]

Glorfindel709 wrote...

But what I cannot accept is being told that because I enjoy dialogue trees, a more moderate combat speed, and the ability to play as an elf in a fantasy world I'm some sort of hateful spiteful fringe gamer who deserves to be marginalized and spammed with hatred every time I give my opinion on the new direction the intellectual property that I enjoy so much has taken.

You're not, so long as your criticism is couched in an objective manner. The posters DG is talking about are clearly those who take to spamming the forum with post after post of uninformed vitriol, even resorting to lying to support their position, and those who intentionally post in a provocative manner.

[Morroian]

Cucco wrote...

I'd also like to point out the contradiction in Mike Laidlaw saying that newcomers should love DA since most of the games they already play use D&D mechanics (sports games with stats, shooters with leveling, etc.), yet apparently those very mechanics are too scary for people who haven't tried DA and other RPGs yet, so they need to soften them. Again, as they say "you won't be able to please everyone" when it comes to trying to get them to enjoy fantasy narratives they simply have no interest in.

The rpg aspects in those games are very light.

[Lee T]

A pet peeve of mind is that the Video Game industry often confuses making something "accessible" with "simplifying" it. Whatever the genre.

Making something "accessible" should be about working on the learning curve, the user interface, the ergonomics, to make the core mechanics "accessible". Way too often they go the easy way of "simplifying" the core mechanics rather than actually making it "accessible".

The big downside being that "simplified" games do not make the uninformed gamers more adept at the genre the way "accessibility" does, giving the "casual" gamers no reason to expand their "gamer horizons" while degrading the gaming experience for the gamers actually interested in the game genre.

Since the Dragon Age team constantly speak of expanding player base I hope they didn't confuse "accessibility" with "simplification" as only one of them will actually expand it by making more players used to the genre while still keeping the core fans in.

I'm confident, but I've already been "once bitten" with ME2 so that kind of speach does get me on the defensive. So please Dragon Age Team prove me wrong and show me real accessibility.

[moilami]

Amioran wrote...

moilami wrote...
That is bad, it seems. Better just have illusions of superiority by facerolling moronical trash mobs. Much better! True superiority is so evil and bad! And none wants to be elite!

So you are "elite"...

Excuse me if I laugh out my pants while you say so. But you know, with words all are "elites", problems arises when facts are near, then these "elites" all dissapear. Case in point the fact that you are still there, making the part of the fool without either realising it. Where's your superiority on this? Dissapeared, as stated.

Just a little advice: beware to whom you say this, someone could take you on your words and then you will have trouble, real trouble. You never know when you have to prove who you really are.

PM your phone number and we can meet. I am very interested to see what kind of people want to whack me IRL because I like hard computer games.

[Glorfindel709]

Morroian

I have been keeping my posts respectful and basing my opinions based on the information we actually have, combined with some light speculation. Ive been flamed quite a few times just because I say that I do not like how ridiculous and fast the combat animations look, or my disappointment with how dialogue with my companions will work.

The way that DGs quote lumps people who complain about the changes in the game because we feel that BioWare isnt "catering" to us is ridiculous. I dont expect them to cater to me, but I'm not going to pretend that the Dragon Age Origins as the original IP has now turned into what comes off as Dragon Mass Effect Age doesn't upset me at all. Because it does, as I tried to say with as much calm politeness as humanly possible a few posts above.

[darkrose]

Morroian wrote...

Glorfindel709 wrote...

But what I cannot accept is being told that because I enjoy dialogue trees, a more moderate combat speed, and the ability to play as an elf in a fantasy world I'm some sort of hateful spiteful fringe gamer who deserves to be marginalized and spammed with hatred every time I give my opinion on the new direction the intellectual property that I enjoy so much has taken.

You're not, so long as your criticism is couched in an objective manner. The posters DG is talking about are clearly those who take to spamming the forum with post after post of uninformed vitriol, even resorting to lying to support their position, and those who intentionally post in a provocative manner.

That may have been his intent, but as someone who's tried to be reasonable about what I don't like about DA2, I kind of feel like I'm getting lumped in with the trolls and dismissed as "someone who doesn't like change". 

ETA: Or, what Glorfindel709 said.

Modifié par darkrose, 04 mars 2011 - 12:59 .

[errant_knight]

JohnstonMR wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

I think it's time to stop using 'perceived.' We've played the demo. We know.

No, you THINK you know.  You have an idea--but that idea might change when you stop making judgments of a 50-60 hour game based on a 30 minute demo. 

No. I do know. I've said all along that I thought the story and characterization to be good, and I see no reason to think otherwise. That can't be judged without playing the whole game, but I can come to a perfectly valid judgement about the art style, the UI, the combat animations and effects, the character models and animations, etc. without playing the entire game.

Modifié par errant_knight, 04 mars 2011 - 01:04 .