1216 réponses à ce sujet

[Ahglock]

FearMonkey wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...
Ultima VII was the best Ultima, anyways.

This is scientific fact. I have charts.

Your science is wrong. Ultima IV was the best Ultima.

Perhaps you forgot to carry the 1. :innocent:





back on topic:
re:article - I find myself agreeing with them as their opinion is roughly the same as my own after having played and completed the demo.

Ultima 3 until the end boss which was almsot as bad as the ME2 end boss.  I honeslty didn't really dig the whole avatar concept, though now that I am thinking about it i kind of want to see if the old ultima games are avaialble legally some where and capable of being played on a modern computer machine.(though I might have to remember how to use dos)

[FearMonkey]

JrayM16 wrote...

FearMonkey wrote...

Aidunno wrote...

baddogkelevra wrote...

The only part of the review with which I agree is that the conversation wheel limits our choices. I don't mind the wheel itself, only that it lends itself to you consistently picking one side of the wheel each time. I had this same feeling when I played Mass Effect 2, when the game actually limited your late-game persuasion skills because you weren't renegade or paragon enough. I wish the system could be built with role playing in mind, meaning that my character may start as an insufferable bastard, but may change by the end of the game 10 freaking years later. Any change I could manually incite, such as picking diplomatic instead of sarcastic, would come off as a drastic paradigm shift, not the natural progression of character.

This post may ease some of your fears about that.. where it talks about Hawk's personality. To me what you have done before influencing choices is far more "RPG" like than simply using a skill.

So...

Diplomatic = Paragon
Humorous = Neutral
Aggressive = Renegade

Yeah, such a departure from Mass Effect 2.

Well, partially, but there are some situations that would make it otherwise.

For instance, say we are talking to a demon and it tempts us with an offer of power or something in exchange for freedom.  Here, the diplomatic option would likely be the one to take the deal as that is the nature of diplomacy.  Agressive would more likely invoke an attack on the demon.

Typical RPG moral standards indicate that deals with demons are bad.  THerefore DA2's wheel system is certainly less constricted on moral guidelines than ME1/2 was.

Your example is slightly flawed in that the Diplomatic option would not be to take the deal, it would be to politely tell the demon to stuff it up it's rear end in as diplomatic a way as possible.

The option to take the deal would probably be another option on the left side of the dialog wheel. At least it would given how it worked in Mass Effect 2.

[Ahglock]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

CRPGs don't require other people.  Tabletop games do.

With nearly everything I enjoy, I enjoy it more when I'm alone.

If you set up jokes like that often I need you in my table top gaming group, we need another straight man. 

[Elsariel]

mindbody wrote...

Lordless wrote...

I know this wasn't directed at me, but you'll get my 2 cents and like it!http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/angel.png
The creation of a system describing dialogue intent (i.e. convo wheel) itself is a limitation. If my response to a question is "Yeah, sure" there at least 2 possible tones in which it could be said... That's a role-playing choice. The wheel tells me what the intent is, thereby removing choice.

I tend to agree with your last paragraph... good cinematography will tend to imitate the eye anyways.... It can be facilitative.

I don't really understand this line of thinking, the writers had some idea of how the line would be said and how the character being spoken too would react whether it is voiced or not. You could make up in your head that you said the "yeah sure" example in a happy positive way but if the character you are speaking too reacts negatively, isn't that worse for roleplaying and immersion? At least with the icons you know the intent and tone of what you are going to say, it's because of what you described that they made this change (ie the much used hitting on Zevran example).

Hehe, in Zevran's case, I think we'd all have benefitted from the romance dialoge being lit up like a runway with a big arrow saying Elf romance this way + 15 approval. 

I only meant that in the past no dialogue wheels were used, so the writers took into account possible tone variations and wrote specifically for that.

Leiliana was the same.  Here I thought we were BFF's talking about our hair and shoes and suddenly she's yelling at me about my relationship with Alistair.    Ninja-mance!!

[Fishy]

FearMonkey wrote...

Aidunno wrote...

baddogkelevra wrote...

The only part of the review with which I agree is that the conversation wheel limits our choices. I don't mind the wheel itself, only that it lends itself to you consistently picking one side of the wheel each time. I had this same feeling when I played Mass Effect 2, when the game actually limited your late-game persuasion skills because you weren't renegade or paragon enough. I wish the system could be built with role playing in mind, meaning that my character may start as an insufferable bastard, but may change by the end of the game 10 freaking years later. Any change I could manually incite, such as picking diplomatic instead of sarcastic, would come off as a drastic paradigm shift, not the natural progression of character.

This post may ease some of your fears about that.. where it talks about Hawk's personality. To me what you have done before influencing choices is far more "RPG" like than simply using a skill.

So...

Diplomatic = Paragon
Humorous = Neutral
Aggressive = Renegade

Yeah, such a departure from Mass Effect 2.

They did it differently from what i have seen and heard..In Mass Effect you had a renegade and paragon bar in your character sheet .You needed higher paragon etc to unlock certain answer and dialogue.

In DA2 you don't have them. The only bar you have it's the rival and friendly thing . Which seem to have little effect on your companions .It's more about what you do or answer .

So if you're more 'ass' to them it's will be a rivality . But you probably won't need a full rival bar to complete their relationship or quest (Unlike DA:O where we had to meta game 90-100 love/friendshp)

That how i see thing.That how i hope bioware have done thing.I don't want to play a Lawful Paladin .. I don't want to play a metric system.Kinda like looting every chest in case you miss some unique silver crossbow of apocalypse.
It's not a dungeons crawler .. I`m not selling 7 stone of Jordan.

Modifié par Suprez30, 04 mars 2011 - 09:57 .

[Elanareon]

What i really complain for bioware games is for their "follow this path to reach your goal" way of questing. Even if your outside the world and not inside a dungeon you are still following a very narrow path... The Article voiced this out really well...

Neverwinter Nights had this at some extent but at least there were some explorations on the sides of the path, in DA series there is only the path...

[FearMonkey]

Ahglock wrote...
I honeslty didn't really dig the whole avatar concept, though now that I am thinking about it i kind of want to see if the old ultima games are avaialble legally some where and capable of being played on a modern computer machine.(though I might have to remember how to use dos)

I loved it. For years after playing that game I would find myself in real-world situations saying to myself things like "I shouldn't have acted that way. Pride is not a Virtue."  Darn that Lord British for making me a better person in real life thanks to his video game!

Also, now that I think about it, Ultima IV was kind of a pioneer in the whole "good/bad", choice/consequence style of gameplay that seems to be all the rage today.

[Lordless]

mindbody wrote...

Lordless wrote...

I know this wasn't directed at me, but you'll get my 2 cents and like it!http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/angel.png
The creation of a system describing dialogue intent (i.e. convo wheel) itself is a limitation. If my response to a question is "Yeah, sure" there at least 2 possible tones in which it could be said... That's a role-playing choice. The wheel tells me what the intent is, thereby removing choice.

I tend to agree with your last paragraph... good cinematography will tend to imitate the eye anyways.... It can be facilitative.

I don't really understand this line of thinking, the writers had some idea of how the line would be said and how the character being spoken too would react whether it is voiced or not. You could make up in your head that you said the "yeah sure" example in a happy positive way but if the character you are speaking too reacts negatively, isn't that worse for roleplaying and immersion? At least with the icons you know the intent and tone of what you are going to say, it's because of what you described that they made this change (ie the much used hitting on Zevran example).

Hehe, in Zevran's case, I think we'd all have benefitted from the romance dialoge being lit up like a runway with a big arrow saying Elf romance this way + 15 approval. 

I only meant that in the past no dialogue wheels were used, so the writers took into account possible tone variations and wrote specifically for that.

I can understand that, I think it becomes very difficult to do once you begin having fully voiced characters though, in DA:O even with a non voiced main character the responses of your companions can't be made up in your head anymore so if you roleplay "wrong"(lol) then their response can end up making zero sense.

[Zetlor]

i don't care,games must evolve,oh the game has some changes is not anymore an rpg...so? i enjoy when games evolve,i don't understand people who like structures....if you like structures go and play an mmo that are all the same...."the game has some dialogues is not a shooter anymore im not going to play it" i really don't undesrstand...what do they want?? another nwn but with more graphics? but the SAME ok?...ok let's eat every day of our lifes pizza ,les't play every single day of our life world of warcraft....please....

[mindbody]

AlanC9 wrote...

mindbody wrote...
You assume the characters spoken to must react to tone (or intent, as you said) rather than the literal meaning.  And imagination is role-playing.  Not imagining is being told a story.
Edit: what I meant is that there is no reason a writer of an RPG can't write with those multiple tones/intents in mind... And I think many times the writers at Bioware have done just that.

By writing with multiple intents in mind, do you mean that there's no NPC response or that response is itself ambiguous, so how the PC spoke is not measured? Sort of an uncertainty principle applied to dialogue?

Weren't there cases in DA:O when you could say something threatening and the NPC would like laugh it off, not knowing whether you were serious... Then you might get the option to actually hurt them, or say "only joking."  Then again, I guess The wheel could give you the same words under all three intents... but I imagine people would hate that. Could be funny though.
Edit: I'm trying to think of a funny example... The only thing I could come up with is:
(Diplomatic): "Dude!"
(Sarcastic):  "Dude!"
(Intimidating): "Dude!"

I'm such a moron.

Modifié par mindbody, 04 mars 2011 - 10:07 .

[mindbody]

Ahglock wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

CRPGs don't require other people.  Tabletop games do.

With nearly everything I enjoy, I enjoy it more when I'm alone.

If you set up jokes like that often I need you in my table top gaming group, we need another straight man. 

Best post ever would be if Sylvius responded with "I'm not straight."

[AlanC9]

How far off the path could you go in KotOR? This seems to be just Bio's style.

Modifié par AlanC9, 04 mars 2011 - 10:17 .

[LobselVith8]

I value the story over the action. If we can have a real impact on the world around us and have agency over our choices in how Kirkwall should change and develop, then I think DA2 is moving in the right direction.

[the_one_54321]

Zetlor wrote...
i really don't undesrstand...what do they want??

For the mechanics to stay as they were in games like NWN, KotOR, DA:O and so on. What is so hard to udnerstand about that? You don't take your car to the mechanic when it's running just fine. And there is a very important difference between buying a new car with new features and taking your car to a mechanic and saying it's broken.

More importantly, lots of other developers are already making games of the variety that BioWare has been trying to emulate recently. And they do a better job ov it. If BioWare is going to make their new games more and more like those other games, well I'm just going to play those other games instead.

[halO bendeR]

Merced652 wrote...

halO bendeR wrote...

This 'editorial' may have actually carried some weight if it was written by someone who played the full game instead of just the demo. There's a reason sites like IGN or Gamespot wouldn't run a piece like this; They require their reviewers to become 'experts' on a game before they review it.

And IGN & Gamespot live off those same game's advertisements. :innocent:

I recall quite a few times seeing large ads for games on high-traffic gaming sites where the games themselves received poor reviews.
But that's besides the point. The problem with this 'editorial' isn't that the guy didn't enjoy the demo and is saying as much, it's the 'end is nigh' hyperbole he uses to paint Bioware in a negative light based on a game he has not played in full. It's the type of thing I expect from some of the people on these forums, not from a website that --presumably-- wants to be taken seriously.

[AlanC9]

mindbody wrote...
Edit: I'm trying to think of a funny example... The only thing I could come up with is: 
(Diplomatic): "Dude!"
(Sarcastic):  "Dude!"
(Intimidating): "Dude!"

Bio should totally do that sometime.

[ManiacalEvil]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Zetlor wrote...
i really don't undesrstand...what do they want??

For the mechanics to stay as they were in games like NWN, KotOR, DA:O and so on. What is so hard to udnerstand about that? You don't take your car to the mechanic when it's running just fine. And there is a very important difference between buying a new car with new features and taking your car to a mechanic and saying it's broken.

More importantly, lots of other developers are already making games of the variety that BioWare has been trying to emulate recently. And they do a better job ov it. If BioWare is going to make their new games more and more like those other games, well I'm just going to play those other games instead.

I still don't see this change of style people speak about. Game plays out much the same to me, I don't see BioWare deviating at all.

[Captain_Obvious]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Zetlor wrote...
i really don't undesrstand...what do they want??

For the mechanics to stay as they were in games like NWN, KotOR, DA:O and so on. What is so hard to udnerstand about that? You don't take your car to the mechanic when it's running just fine. And there is a very important difference between buying a new car with new features and taking your car to a mechanic and saying it's broken.

More importantly, lots of other developers are already making games of the variety that BioWare has been trying to emulate recently. And they do a better job ov it. If BioWare is going to make their new games more and more like those other games, well I'm just going to play those other games instead.

How do you think the mechanics in NWN, KOTOR and DA:O were created?  You must have innovation somewhere along that line to create the mechanics that you love so much in them.  How do you know that this one is going to be a good versus bad innovation in the long run?

[the_one_54321]

ManiacalEvil wrote...
I still don't see this change of style
people speak about. Game plays out much the same to me, I don't see
BioWare deviating at all.

Actually, I don't see a huge change in combat mechanics between DA:O and DA][ either. I was just answering that posters supposed lack of understanding.

However, the ME franchise is a serious departure.

Captain_Obvious wrote...
How do you think the mechanics in NWN, KOTOR and DA:O were created?  You must have innovation somewhere along that line to create the mechanics that you love so much in them.  How do you know that this one is going to be a good versus bad innovation in the long run?

NWN and KotOR were not inovations. They were d20 based. DA:O was just a smallish step away from that. It works. Again, DA][ doesn't appear to be a vast departure either. However, again, the ME franchise is.

[AlanC9]

So people are actually complaining about ME when they're talking about DA2??

[the_one_54321]

AlanC9 wrote...
So people are actually complaining about ME when they're talking about DA2??

Um, no? Other folks do feel that DA][ is too much of a departure. I'm not one of them.

[NewYears1978]

I actually feel, for me, this article is dead on..  and it saddens me, but I hope that I still enjoy the game..

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ahglock wrote...

Ultima 3 until the end boss which was almsot as bad as the ME2 end boss.  I honeslty didn't really dig the whole avatar concept, though now that I am thinking about it i kind of want to see if the old ultima games are avaialble legally some where and capable of being played on a modern computer machine.(though I might have to remember how to use dos)

DOSBox.

There's a flash version of U4 available here:

http://www.phipsisof...a4/Ultima4.html

But it's a bit buggy.  I've had trouble with the moongates, and sometimes NPCs respond to questions you didn't ask.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

NWN and KotOR were not inovations.

And they were great.

[Merced652]

I've actually been hunting around for a copy of win98 to throw on an old p4 i have sitting around. Would use it to play the hell out of mechwarrior 2 and the early ultimas.