Aller au contenu

Photo

An article on "Dragon Age II: The Decline of the classic RPG"


1216 réponses à ce sujet

#676
DrunkenMagicianNL

DrunkenMagicianNL
  • Members
  • 44 messages

ibortolis wrote...

worth reading it

http://www.hookedgam...lassic_rpg.html

a small summary,thanks to gamebanshee:

"None of this would be so much of an issue if BioWare lived up to their
promises and actually provided two viable styles of playing the game.
Everyone can sympathise with their decision to add real-time combat to
the game and make it easier for new players to get into the game, in
fact we support it. The more people you can get to play your game the
better; cRPGs are notoriously hard to start off with so making things a
bit easier for beginners is great. However, the issue arises when you
change the very core of the game. The real time combat should in fact be
harder to play. At the beginning of The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall,
players were asked if they would like high or low player reflexes
enabled, the slower being easier because players could adopt “a more
cautious and thoughtful playstyle”. This is the kind of option that
should be given in Dragon Age 2. Instead the game only truly caters to
the fast, button-mashing style.

Playing with these kinds of
settings just isn’t right for the traditional pause-play style. People
have argued that if you want that traditional experience then you can
simply play on a harder game mode, but this does not solve it. The
difficulty simply makes the game harder with modifiers such as friendly
fire (in nightmare mode) tougher enemies and so on, but it is still
played as an Action-RPG. While playing the demo, pausing the game to
issue an attack on an enemy just felt completely ridiculous, as they
would have already landed 3 attacks on you by the time you have done
one. The only possible way to do it is to pause and unpause the game
every half a second, therefore forcing players to simply mash buttons
until the enemy is dead. Dragon Age 2 is a real-time Action-RPG, and so
having the pause-play (that only really works with the slower pace of
turn-based RPG’s) is just an unnecessary feature rather than another way
to play through the game.

Like many other developers, BioWare
have made their three main cRPG series into Action-RPGs with Mass Effect
2, Dragon Age 2 and Star Wars: The Old Republic. There is no doubt that
these will be great games, but the problem is that they have been
sculpted to what will sell, rather than making the gaming experience
that a number of players are struggling to find nowadays. The market has
always been driven by sales, but nowadays the publishers and producers
are sacrificing genres in order to make more money. As said previously,
Dragon Age: Origins was a commercial success so there was no real need
to change the game so dramatically. This declination is inextricably
tied in to the popularity of consoles over PCs amongst today’s gamers.
As gaming spreads to mass audiences, producers and publishers are lured
by the money that comes along with it. In this case it seems that EA
have encouraged BioWare to open up the game to a bigger audience, and in
doing so have lost many aspects of the genre it once was.


Worse still, there are signs that the game has been rushed out to meet
publisher demands. The graphics are not going to mesmerise anyone, in
fact they don’t look any better compared to Origins, environments are
fairly dull looking but worst of all is weak level design. The review in
PC Games has said that the majority of Dragon Age 2 plays out very much
like the demo, meaning a lot of copy-pasted and narrow paths - ugly.
Narrow paths in an RPG is actually an oxymoron as the genre requires
freedom and an open world and should not be bottle-necking its players.
What this effect does however, is focus the game more towards combat as
is the nature of an action-RPG. It’s quite understandable that all of
these shortcomings have occurred as BioWare are making an effort to
bring out all three of their big RPGs in one year. Given that Dragon Age
2 has only had a maximum of two years in development, many of us
suspected that the game would fall short in some areas. This lack of an
open world, combined with the simple combat means that the game slides
even further from its origins. "


I totally agree with the article. In fact: I'm not getting DA2 because of it. I'm not much of a gamer anyway, the last game I've played was Mass Effect 2, and I would have had a hard time deciding between DA2 or The Witcher 2, but I guess I have to thank BioWare for making the decision easy!

Hopefully their next game will be worth considering...:lol:;)

#677
Graunt

Graunt
  • Members
  • 1 444 messages

Ahglock wrote...

Derrp wrote...

I enjoy the combat way more in ME2 than the first one

But I had 0 problem with DA:O's combat ... It reminded me a lot of NW nights and Baldur's Gate

The times are a changing though ... the old school is pretty much dead .. gaming got a lot bigger .. catering to less popular game types = less money

Making a game that has a cult following and is praised up and down by hardcore rpg players is way less profitable than a shorter, shallower, more mainstream game ( DA 2 ) .. so we can be really bitter and knock everything new or we can accept this is how things are just going to be from now on and we can really celebrate that occasional gem that reminds you more of the old rpg's


I think the issue of combat from lets say ME1 to ME2 is the targetting circle or crosshairs.  If you put in crosshairs and you line up a great headshot and the game says you rolled a 1 so you miss it irritates people.  If they had gone sci-fi rpg but had you click on targets like lets say grand theft auto and it used a die roll to hit I think people would have been fine with it. 

Also on the more less profitable side, DA sold really well.  I think better than ME so I am not sure why they would want to ME the game. 


Because again, sales don't indicate that everything is fine and that nothing needs to change.  Why is this such a hard concept to grasp?  Also, are you talking about ME or ME2 sales?  Why wouldn't Origins sell more than ME, especially since that game probably attracted new Bioware fans?  As for ME2, another reason is because that wasn't even out on the PS3 until recently.

Modifié par Graunt, 05 mars 2011 - 06:09 .


#678
RJPOGI

RJPOGI
  • Members
  • 22 messages
what have you done with my beloved D&D bioware! i lost faith with you. i've been a fan since BG2 and bought all your games but i'll give CD Projeck my money instead. i hope you're reading this !!!

Modifié par RJPOGI, 05 mars 2011 - 06:09 .


#679
AkiKishi

AkiKishi
  • Members
  • 10 898 messages

Graunt wrote...

Because again, sales don't indicate that everything is fine and that nothing needs to change.  Why is this such a hard concept to grasp?


It's not really about that, this is Bioware "Circling the Wagons".

Like people have said DA sold well - Yay !! 
Then the data comes in that only a low % of people finished it -- ??? booo
Strategy meeting "ME2 sold well lets make DA2 like that"  - YEAH !!

If you look at DA2 it's all about playing "safe" DA was the opposite it was a total gamble which paid off.

#680
Dorian the Monk of Sune

Dorian the Monk of Sune
  • Members
  • 165 messages

termokanden wrote...


Agreed. Oblivion was a clear step back from Morrowind, and Gothic 3 and 4 were way worse than Gothic 2. I honestly never tried the older TES games so I won't comment on that.

Newer is not always better.


At least Oblivion was a technincal advancement with the sim AI and the graphics. 


BobSmith101 wrote...


If you look at DA2 it's all about playing "safe" DA was the opposite it was a total gamble which paid off. 


DA was not a gamble. The gameplay was similar to KOTOR and western RPGs were selling like crazy on consoles since Morrowind.

Modifié par Dorian the Monk of Sune, 05 mars 2011 - 06:21 .


#681
CitizenThom

CitizenThom
  • Members
  • 2 429 messages
I still don't understand the 'game finished' stat. I have maybe two games in my collection that I haven't finished (yet). Are there really a large number of people out there who spend the money on games, and opt not to play them all the way through? The only thing that keeps me from finishing games right away is when other games come out, but I eventually and come back to finish a game all the same.

FWIW The rumors of classical rpg's being dead are highly exaggerated. The interface changes, but the interface isn't the genre in my opinion. I am and will always be a fan of turn based combat, but real-time combat is a change in the interface, not the death of the genre.

#682
Grunk

Grunk
  • Members
  • 134 messages

RageGT wrote...

And honestly, people bashing Origins should really be ashamed. It is a poor justification for a poor design decision on the new title of the series and there is no justification.

Bored with DA:O? Well, I ain't bored with it after 20 playthroughs and over 2,000 hrs and like me, great part of the Origins fan base. At least some 1,300,000 of the 1,400,000 viewers of my vids. Like me, many never repeated an exact playthrough with it and even now I can still find out new stuff to try. When I tried to repeat the exact same character who had sacrificed in the first run, so he could be alive for Awakening, he ended up so much better than the first version.

And like Gothic 1 and 2, Risen, The Witcher, I'll be replaying Origins for a long time, I hope.


I don't feel the need to be ashamed about my preferences. DA:O bored the hell out of me around halfway through. I only finished one playthrough like a year later mainly just to see the end battle. Just because you like something doesn't mean I should feel ashamed that I don't. Maybe you should feel ashamed for typing such an outlandish thing.

For me, DA2 is a step in a good direction. I guess it's not for you, but luckily, you can still play games you do like. No need to start bandying all these heavily weighted terms like shame and all that junk.

#683
AkiKishi

AkiKishi
  • Members
  • 10 898 messages

CitizenThom wrote...

I still don't understand the 'game finished' stat. I have maybe two games in my collection that I haven't finished (yet). Are there really a large number of people out there who spend the money on games, and opt not to play them all the way through? .


Yes. The number of "used" games you see the day after something is released is testament to that. That's the biggest change I think,prior to that, if you bought a duff game, you could either chalk it up to experience and let it gather dust or just try to finish it anyway.
Now as long as you are quick you can re-sell with only a £10 loss which is quite attractive ,or even just trade in for a new game for £10 extra.

(that's just how it works where Ilive, it's not a standard of course).

Dorian the Monk of Sune wrote...
DA was not a gamble. The gameplay was similar to KOTOR and western RPGs were selling like crazy on consoles since Morrowind.


There was nothing that indicated an old school RPG would still sell though. KOTOR is old in game years. Stuff like Morrowind etc. Single character. DA was ported to console, it never intended to be a console game at first.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 05 mars 2011 - 06:31 .


#684
Guest_simfamUP_*

Guest_simfamUP_*
  • Guests
Stupid Luddite ><

#685
Graunt

Graunt
  • Members
  • 1 444 messages
If you want to take an already established franchise and "modern it up", this is how you do it: www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2011/03/04/the-witcher-2-assassin-of-kings-preview/1

So sure, it's not "classic" in the dull sense, but it's no outright action game either.

At least Oblivion was a technincal advancement with the sim AI and the graphics.


So?  It played like a tech demo too.

Modifié par Graunt, 05 mars 2011 - 06:34 .


#686
Guest_simfamUP_*

Guest_simfamUP_*
  • Guests
I find it ridiculous that "fans" would complain about DA2s combat being to 'hacknslash' then go on and buy The Witcher 2?!

A good RPG is a good RPG combat or no.

#687
Anathemic

Anathemic
  • Members
  • 2 361 messages

simfamSP wrote...

I find it ridiculous that "fans" would complain about DA2s combat being to 'hacknslash' then go on and buy The Witcher 2?!

A good RPG is a good RPG combat or no.


For me it's not the actual combat persay but it's more of the transition (And the fact that the action hack n slash is subpar at best)

#688
Siven80

Siven80
  • Members
  • 1 505 messages
This thread still going on huh.

This article/rant comes out every time a new rpg comes out tbh. Nothing new.

I like DAO, i like what ive seen/heard of DA2. I'm not stuck in the past, and i like thw witcher and will be buying both DA2 and Witcher2 :)

#689
DragonRageGT

DragonRageGT
  • Members
  • 6 071 messages

Graunt wrote...

....  Some people will be playing it in ten years, but it won't be some classic that people are only playing because nothing better came along since.


Exactly! Some people will be playing it in ten years because it is a masterpiece! Like those 10yrs old masterpieces I and a whole lot of people still play today, even if we do play new good stuff as well.

Google for "Gothic Hardcore Mode"! (don't forget the mode or you'll only get porn in the results!!! lol)

#690
ManiacalEvil

ManiacalEvil
  • Members
  • 208 messages
There will be people playing DA2 10 years from now. That proves nothing.

#691
Graunt

Graunt
  • Members
  • 1 444 messages

ManiacalEvil wrote...

There will be people playing DA2 10 years from now. That proves nothing.


Really, I just don't see how people can replay single player games, especially role-playing games more than a few times.  To me it's like people that can watch the same movie over and over again expecting to see something new. I've seen a few thousand movies (counting television shows as well) in my lifetime, but I only own fourty; most of which are only watched once every few years or even once a decade, and those are hour and a half to three hour endeavours tops.

There has to be more to a "game" than just picking a different text option from a multiple choice list and some pretty cutscenes.  If the actual gameplay isn't compelling or rewarding (Diablo 2), I just see no reason for repeat revisits beyond two or three.  Then again, I also only find that there's ever only around five truly outstanding titles released across all platforms annually.  This year seems to be the odd-man-out exception though thankfully.

Modifié par Graunt, 05 mars 2011 - 07:47 .


#692
Dorian the Monk of Sune

Dorian the Monk of Sune
  • Members
  • 165 messages

Graunt wrote...


So?  It played like a tech demo too.


How so?   

There was plenty ‘game’. Besides the armor, level, scaling and the lack of weapon skills the game was technically polished while the AI, the horses, and the draw range were upgrades. Artistically it was a heartlands answer to the exotics of Morrowind.  

Modifié par Dorian the Monk of Sune, 05 mars 2011 - 07:48 .


#693
Graunt

Graunt
  • Members
  • 1 444 messages

Dorian the Monk of Sune wrote...

Graunt wrote...


So?  It played like a tech demo too.


How so?   

There was plenty ‘game’. Besides the armor, level, scaling and the lack of weapon skills the game was technically polished while the AI, the horses, and the draw range were upgrades. Artistically it was a heartlands answer to the exotics of Morrowind.  


The combat was some of the dullest I've experienced since Hexen, the leveling system was beyond stupid (as were the leveled loot tables) and none of the sidequests were actually compelling at all outside of the Grey Fox.  It focused so much on graphics that it could often distract from the fact that it was completely hollow.  

Morrowind was similar yes, but it had so much more character overall, and for whatever reason the gameplay didn't seem quite as braindead.  Maybe I was just sick of Morrowind by the time Oblivion came out and was wanting more than just a facial.

Modifié par Graunt, 05 mars 2011 - 07:55 .


#694
Rawgrim

Rawgrim
  • Members
  • 11 532 messages
Aparantly the auto-attack function is messed up in DA2 as well. If you wish to auto attack, you need to select it manually, for each seperate enemy. Basically the game forces you to button mash. Yet another "non classic" rpg thing.

#695
Graunt

Graunt
  • Members
  • 1 444 messages

Rawgrim wrote...

Aparantly the auto-attack function is messed up in DA2 as well. If you wish to auto attack, you need to select it manually, for each seperate enemy. Basically the game forces you to button mash. Yet another "non classic" rpg thing.


What do you mean, you have to toggle it to "on" for each enemy and it doesn't simply remain on after the initial selection?

#696
Rawgrim

Rawgrim
  • Members
  • 11 532 messages
Aparantly you have to toggle in ON, for each seperate enemy. Thats what people keep telling me, anyway.

Modifié par Rawgrim, 05 mars 2011 - 08:06 .


#697
Aidunno

Aidunno
  • Members
  • 468 messages

BobSmith101 wrote...

Like people have said DA sold well - Yay !! 
Then the data comes in that only a low % of people finished it -- ??? booo
Strategy meeting "ME2 sold well lets make DA2 like that"  - YEAH !!

If you look at DA2 it's all about playing "safe" DA was the opposite it was a total gamble which paid off.

Playing the logic game... DAO paid off as a one time thing when people didn't know what they were really getting. Those people who only played for an hour would probably not buy a sequel. Purely made up numbers but 5 million buy a game, 2 million play for only an hour indicates only 3 million players would buy a sequel. I know it's not as clear cut as that but you can understand the thinking of why completion is important. If you wanted Bioware to gamble again it would need to be in another IP, not a sequel. I would imagine that ME2 had a high completion rate.

It should also be noted that the changes between the two ME's were far larger than between the two DA's.

#698
AkiKishi

AkiKishi
  • Members
  • 10 898 messages

Aidunno wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Like people have said DA sold well - Yay !! 
Then the data comes in that only a low % of people finished it -- ??? booo
Strategy meeting "ME2 sold well lets make DA2 like that"  - YEAH !!

If you look at DA2 it's all about playing "safe" DA was the opposite it was a total gamble which paid off.

Playing the logic game... DAO paid off as a one time thing when people didn't know what they were really getting. Those people who only played for an hour would probably not buy a sequel. Purely made up numbers but 5 million buy a game, 2 million play for only an hour indicates only 3 million players would buy a sequel. I know it's not as clear cut as that but you can understand the thinking of why completion is important. If you wanted Bioware to gamble again it would need to be in another IP, not a sequel. I would imagine that ME2 had a high completion rate.

It should also be noted that the changes between the two ME's were far larger than between the two DA's.


I completely agree. ME did not sell that well though , so in that case there was a need to change.

There are stats for ME2 might be in earlier posts in this thread.

Here we go.


83% of players created their own face for Shepard
82% play as male Shepard, 18% as female Shepard
The Soldier class is far and away the most popular class at 65%
<Archangel> was among the most popular squad members selected for missions
10% of players never let <The Krogan> out of <his/her thing>
Only 50% of players have fully upgraded the <Ship> by the end of the game
14% of squad members die in the end-game, on average
36% of players chose the <Renegade choice> in the end-game

Modifié par BobSmith101, 05 mars 2011 - 08:32 .


#699
soteria

soteria
  • Members
  • 3 307 messages

Graunt wrote...
Console gaming is much cheaper than PC gaming, especially if you rent games. This is especially true in households with children. You can't honestly be suggesting that a PC is as childproof to a ten year old than what a Wii or 360 is -- consoles are also less expensive to repair. On top of that, your average "good" television will last around six to eight years, while the truly great ones can last a little over ten. If you aren't spending $500+ on a much smaller PC monitor, you will have to replace it every three or four.

Much cheaper is an exaggeration--the PS3 was $600 when it came out. They've gone down in price since then, true, but if you don't own a TV (I don't), the costs of buying a console, a television, and a good sound system come pretty close to what I would spend building a new PC. You, like many others, underestimate the costs of a console because you make a lot of assumptions.

Lastly, consoles will get you through the next four to five years of gaming, while a PC will not without upgrades along the way. Building a new "medium" level gaming rig costs right around $1,500 and those are usually only able to keep up for three years without buying a new graphics card. When you do end up getting a new graphics card, they usually cost as much as a console, if not more unless you wait six to eight months after they've been released, and by then you're even farther behind the curve.

I paid $1100 for all the parts of my machine (not including a monitor--I already owned one) sometime in the spring of 2008. Three years later, I haven't spent a penny upgrading it and it still runs games on max or near-max settings. On the other hand, I don't have any new shooters.
$1500 is not a "medium-end" machine. If you're only getting "medium" for $1500 you're spending too much for parts. After all, my machine could be called "medium" and it's three years old and only cost 70% of what you're talking about.

#700
Aidunno

Aidunno
  • Members
  • 468 messages

BobSmith101 wrote...

There are stats for ME2 might be in earlier posts in this thread.

... stats given ...


But nothing showing how many people finished the game and are therefore likely to buy ME3... We don't know if 50% have fully upgraded by end of the game is 50% of those who actually played the the game although I doubt it. My impression is that with the "feedback" function, if people want specific styles of game not only do they need to buy the games, they need to complete them. Lets face it.. sequels cost far less than starting a new IP with the costs of developing the lore, but also recognition in the marketplace.

If people want more of what they consider "RPG elements" they need to take into consideration what others like/dislike and, after completing the game shout about the features that worked well and those that didn't. I do not think that, given the completion rate of DAO, you can expect a duplicate but the community should be able to reach some middle ground if DA2 is a "completion rate" sucess and DA3 ever is made. For me, after initial impressions I would be happier if they simply removed the exploding effects when you hit something with a sword. Minor thing I know but a major thing I dislike. Then again I realise I am probably in the minority.

Modifié par Aidunno, 05 mars 2011 - 08:50 .