1216 réponses à ce sujet

[AkiKishi]

Aidunno wrote...

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 completed the game. 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.

Those are around too but I don't know where sorry. I'm sure someone will know and pop them up though.

[AlanC9]

88mphSlayer wrote...

just an idea on compromise for the dialogue wheel with crpg's: http://img607.images...dwheelcrpg.jpg/

place the "wheel" at the left hand side and have all dialogue options on the right and increase the number of options, this would create space for the developer to simply write in exactly what's going to be said and at the same time keep the logos for players who want the visual cue, it wouldn't be too far fetched from say... Planescape Torment which had "truth" and "bluff" beside various dialogue options as well

Bio tested writing out the whole dialog. According to Mike Laidlaw, people liked the paraphrases better.

[Graunt]

[quote]soteria wrote...
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.[/quote]

How is it an exaggeration?  I know exactly how much I pay out of pocket for a PC every three years to remain "up to date" and I know exactly how much I have to spend on a console, and on top of that you can't rent PC games that I know of.  

I paid $300 for both of the current gen consoles.  I wasn't going to spend $600 on a system that had no "must have" games, especially for the price just like I don't spend $600 on a graphics card when you can get the one right below it for $400 or less without that large of a gap in performance.  So let's see... I spent $600 total for both the PS3 and the 360.  I bought a new 42 inch Plasma television just because I did not have an HD tv yet and my last was around eight years old.  I paid $700 for it.  So now we are up to $1300 over the last six years.  That's already less than what I pay for a new PC every three years.  I also don't buy "top of the line" but I also don't buy the "yes, you have the minimum specs to run at medium settings" rig either.

[/quote]
[quote]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.[/quote]

Notice, you say $1100 "not including a monitor".  LCD tech is really shoddy and you can't get a decent resolution "fast" monitor that lasts for a long time.  You'll have to buy a new monitor every 3-4 years too, so you can't act like that's not a factor.

$1,500 is definitely among the medium end, especially when you purchase when new processors and graphics cards hit the market.  If I were to build my same PC today that I built around Sept 2009, I could probably get it for $1,000 or less too.  Timing is everything, and I don't wait until the hardware is already eight months behind, so thanks for sharing but I'm up to date with how "cheap" you can build a computer.  Notice, I keep saying terms like "up to date".  Some of you really need to learn what that means before commenting.

Modifié par Graunt, 05 mars 2011 - 10:03 .

[ManiacalEvil]

I currently have 4 Gigs of RAM, a GTX560 and a i5 2500k and it costed me around 750$, keeping my HDD, optical drive and case. This is an update to a 5 years old build I built for around the same cost and that lasted me 5 years. It would have lasted more, had the mmotherboard not died from elecrical surges, which can also happen to a console.

Modifié par ManiacalEvil, 05 mars 2011 - 10:10 .

[Graunt]

ManiacalEvil wrote...

I currently have 4 Gigs of RAM, a GTX560 and a i5 2500k and it costed me around 750$, keeping my HDD, optical drive and case. This is an update to a 5 years old build I built for around the same cost and that lasted me 5 years. It would have lasted more, had the mmotherboard not died from elecrical surges, which can also happen to a console.

Ok, congrats on keeping a five year old HD?  It's not like a 1TB costs more than $99 anyway.  I'm not sure what your point is either, because you aren't even comparing a new system to a new system.  

My graphics card was $375 when it first hit, the processor $250, the motherboard $200, the case $100, the 8gb ram $200 (and before anyone makes any comment, RAM prices fluctuate quite a bit, especially when you're not going for bargain bin high latency), , monitor was $300, heatsink/fan $50, Hard Drives were $200, DVD rewriter was $80. Power supply was $130. That's not including Windows 7 either.  If you think that's "high end" it would help to do a little research.  Most of what I buy is overclocked too...which is why I'm NOT paying for the top of the line.

Modifié par Graunt, 05 mars 2011 - 10:25 .

[88mphSlayer]

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? 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.

sure, i still haven't finished GTA4 and don't really want to finish it... i played until i no longer wanted to play and quit, lost the save file and don't really want to start over
similarly i played Fallout 3 when it came out, never finished the main quest and lost the save file, came back 2 years later and decided to do the main quest only, i still haven't finish Fable 2 either
in fact, if i went through my entire collection of games i'd probably find a good half of them i played a lot of but never finished, some of them i got distracted by something else, others i got stuck and never bothered, others i lost the save file to, others i didn't lose the save file but no longer remember what happened so i don't care anymore
etc.

[ManiacalEvil]

Graunt wrote...

ManiacalEvil wrote...

I currently have 4 Gigs of RAM, a GTX560 and a i5 2500k and it costed me around 750$, keeping my HDD, optical drive and case. This is an update to a 5 years old build I built for around the same cost and that lasted me 5 years. It would have lasted more, had the mmotherboard not died from elecrical surges, which can also happen to a console.

Ok, congrats on keeping a five year old HD?  It's not like a 1TB costs more than $99 anyway.  I'm not sure what your point is either, because you aren't even comparing a new system to a new system.  

My graphics card was $375 when it first hit, the processor $250, the motherboard $200, the case $100, the 8gb ram $200 (and before anyone makes any comment, RAM prices fluctuate quite a bit, especially when you're not going for bargain bin high latency), , monitor was $300, heatsink/fan $50, Hard Drives were $200, DVD rewriter was $80. Power supply was $130. That's not including Windows 7 either.  If you think that's "high end" it would help to do a little research.  Most of what I buy is overclocked too...which is why I'm NOT paying for the top of the line.

I don't know why people just throw away their HDDs, DVD writers and cases and then complain the computer costs too much. You don't throw your TV away when you buy a new console, do you? For your informatio my 320GB disk is still doing quite well. If I want I can buy a 25$ 320 GB disk and put them in RAID0, getting speed and more than enough space (for me at least, YMMV). And exactly why do you need to pay for windows 7 if you have XP? For DirectX11, which is  used in a total of what? 11 games?

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

BobSmith101 wrote...




36% of players chose the <Renegade choice> in the end-game

Thats crazy. The Renegade choice was a no brainer and certainly for the greater good. 

[LenaMarie]

Not that i have a problem, I accepted ages ago classic RPGs were dead but really the problem here is EA. I imagine bioware would have loved to countiue with their plans. EA however saw Console users disappointed and naturally, EA Cannot allow the Console crowd to be upset, Enter DA 2. This is regardless of the fact DA: O was a success, generally speaking.

But oh well, cinematic Action RPGs are more fun....right?

[ManiacalEvil]

LenaMarie wrote...

Not that i have a problem, I accepted ages ago classic RPGs were dead but really the problem here is EA. I imagine bioware would have loved to countiue with their plans. EA however saw Console users disappointed and naturally, EA Cannot allow the Console crowd to be upset, Enter DA 2. This is regardless of the fact DA: O was a success, generally speaking.

But oh well, cinematic Action RPGs are more fun....right?

So BioWare shouldn't have made the game better on consoles, while keeping pc the same? They should have just screwed the console players over?

[qountpaqula]

I agree with the article. Playing it for lesbians.

[Elvhen Veluthil]

There are some rumors that Obsidian is going to make Icewind Dale 3, and if that's true, don't put a R.I.P Old School RPG yet, we may get one of those games in a couple of year from now.

And of course I agree 100% with the article, but the thing is that Bioware has made great efforts with DA2 to communicate what kind of game they made and what audience they target, so I for one can't blame them that they didn't delivered. They said they will make an action-cinematic RPG, the demo shows that they have done just that. Good for the people that like that kind of games (Diablo III, Dungeon Siege III should be on your list too), bad for the ones that don't like them (count me in). I am not disappointed because I never felt that Bioware owned me a great game, and that's because I only learned that they made Baldur's Gate saga about 5 years before, being under the impression that Black Isle was the developer of that game for all these years (and I preferred it that way), always wondering what the hell was that out of place Bioware's logo doing among the great logo of TSR and Black Isle. So yeah, even if Bioware has taken another direction, no big loss for me, there are other companies out there that will make games I like.

[LenaMarie]

ManiacalEvil wrote...

LenaMarie wrote...

Not that i have a problem, I accepted ages ago classic RPGs were dead but really the problem here is EA. I imagine bioware would have loved to countiue with their plans. EA however saw Console users disappointed and naturally, EA Cannot allow the Console crowd to be upset, Enter DA 2. This is regardless of the fact DA: O was a success, generally speaking.

But oh well, cinematic Action RPGs are more fun....right?

So BioWare shouldn't have made the game better on consoles, while keeping pc the same? They should have just screwed the console players over?

With How many games get catered to the console crowd, yes, Not every game on the planet has to be made to please console users. Sure adding in some things to make console users happy is cool, but what is not cool is scrapping everything to redesign it all to make console users happy and screw PC gamers.

[ManiacalEvil]

LenaMarie wrote...

ManiacalEvil wrote...

LenaMarie wrote...

Not that i have a problem, I accepted ages ago classic RPGs were dead but really the problem here is EA. I imagine bioware would have loved to countiue with their plans. EA however saw Console users disappointed and naturally, EA Cannot allow the Console crowd to be upset, Enter DA 2. This is regardless of the fact DA: O was a success, generally speaking.

But oh well, cinematic Action RPGs are more fun....right?

So BioWare shouldn't have made the game better on consoles, while keeping pc the same? They should have just screwed the console players over?

With How many games get catered to the console crowd, yes, Not every game on the planet has to be made to please console users. Sure adding in some things to make console users happy is cool, but what is not cool is scrapping everything to redesign it all to make console users happy and screw PC gamers.

Lucky they kept everything mostly the same.

[Jitter]

You know i didn't realize it ....
But this game ..IS Diablo 4 .... .
Every button push does something awsome. well at least the first 40 times you see it.

I saw a diablo trailer the other day , and just put it together.
If you sub out some UI elements from one game to the other , it's the same game.
Large warrior making super awsome jumps while lightning shoots out his ass , incinerating the foes behind him . All while waving an axe so large so fast , that im sure physics would assert that the warrior is in fact spliting the atom with each swing.

And i would totally love this , if i wanted to play Diablo ... and was a 10 year old with Attention issues , all strung out on Mountain Dew .

But im not that guy , i was the adult that loved the first game , not the child A.D.D target audience this game is for.

It's not even Dragon Age. I mean
if you take out the size of the world , limit motion to narrow arcade like paths, drop all of the races , and change up all of the art work , change the game mechanics camera angles and fighting, and textures.

Oh crap i think i just described changing everything about the game.
And yet still call it Dragon Age and the people who loved the first will buy it anyway.

Sad that so many are so easliy played for morons.

To those who are interested , i have a bag full of gold ill sell you for a deal .
8 bucks.

I know it looks like sand , but it isn't it's just gold .
We streamlined it down the periodic table, the number was quite high , we lowered it to make it easy to remember.
Then we remade the gold look into a muted sandy color to make it consistent with the rest of the earth colors.
And the bag seemed heavy , so we made it lighter by not using gold.

But the Bag says "Gold" , so there it is a Bag of Gold , 8$ , wow what a deal im so excited at the possibility of buying it.

And you can too 8$ bag of gold , if you buy it early , we will include a bag of manure labeled Diamonds too ,,, FREE!!!

Modifié par Jitter, 06 mars 2011 - 01:00 .

[Jitter]

Double

Modifié par Jitter, 06 mars 2011 - 12:41 .

[88mphSlayer]

LenaMarie wrote...

Not that i have a problem, I accepted ages ago classic RPGs were dead but really the problem here is EA. I imagine bioware would have loved to countiue with their plans. EA however saw Console users disappointed and naturally, EA Cannot allow the Console crowd to be upset, Enter DA 2. This is regardless of the fact DA: O was a success, generally speaking.

But oh well, cinematic Action RPGs are more fun....right?

two things EA really has reigns on right now:
1) general design focus - everything must be action packed
-this was equally true years ago as well, ie: why oh why did Mirror's Edge need guns? and DAO was equally action-focused as it was a talkie
-this is definitely true nowadays, ie: Dante's Inferno, BFBC2, Mass Effect 2, Shank, Medal of Honor, Dead Space 2, Crysis 2, Dragon Age 2 are all about the blood, gore, big guns or just being a big goddamn hero
-that said it seems that as long as you meet the blood/gore/big goddamn hero quota, they let you do whatever else you'd like to do with a game

2) platforms differences must not exist comrade
-this wasn't true in the past, DAO was clearly leagues better on the PC, same with Mirror's Edge, Mass Effect 1 was a huge improvement on the Microsoft published version on the 360, Crysis was a big PC graphics wankfest
-you look at Mass Effect 2, Crysis 2, Bulletstorm and Dragon Age 2 and the differences are few and far between, Crysis 2 being so much so that it's a miracle they even have any options to improve graphics

so other than those 2, whatever

Action RPG's are the new trend in the same way that all RPG's were once turn-based only and went semi Action-turn-based with Baldur's Gate, this is nothing new really and it's something the industry has been moving towards for over 10 years (Diablo anybody?), and there are great big successes for Action RPG's for the "omg my 1337 skills" rpg crowd such as Demon's Souls

Modifié par 88mphSlayer, 06 mars 2011 - 01:10 .

[moilami]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Deciding that Dragon Age II is not a classic RPG based on a 30 minute demo is stupid. In the first 30 minutes of BGI, you get to walk around a single, tiny environment, find someone a book and fight rats with a single character.

DA2 is worst of RPG and action adventure.

Lack of choise is worst of RPG and lack of skill is worst of action adventure.

In God of War arcade action one at least needed skill.

In BG and NWN I could kill NPCs. There is my line for what is classic RPG.

This dumbing down what people call evolution is very much like backwards "evolution" back to bacteria.

(Taking offers of DA2 signature edition.)

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

ManiacalEvil wrote...


So BioWare shouldn't have made the game better on consoles, while keeping pc the same? They should have just screwed the console players over?

Its the same game. The tacticle cam is gone for everyone. If DA 2 is less of a game than DA:O then its less of game for everyone. Its true exclusive console gamers might have lower standards. Its also true that people are people. 

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

moilami wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Deciding that Dragon Age II is not a classic RPG based on a 30 minute demo is stupid. In the first 30 minutes of BGI, you get to walk around a single, tiny environment, find someone a book and fight rats with a single character.

DA2 is worst of RPG and action adventure.

Lack of choise is worst of RPG and lack of skill is worst of action adventure.

In God of War arcade action one at least needed skill.

In BG and NWN I could kill NPCs. There is my line for what is classic RPG.

This dumbing down what people call evolution is very much like backwards "evolution" back to bacteria.

(Taking offers of DA2 signature edition.)

Lack of choice?

Compared to the typical western dungeon hak or BaldursGate and 90% of JRPGs DA has ok.

[Anathemic]

Jitter wrote...

You know i didn't realize it ....
But this game ..IS Diablo 4 .... .
Every button push does something awsome. well at least the first 40 times you see it.

I saw a diablo trailer the other day , and just put it together.
If you sub out some UI elements from one game to the other , it's the same game.
Large warrior making super awsome jumps while lightning shoots out his ass , incinerating the foes behind him . All while waving an axe so large so fast , that im sure physics would assert that the warrior is in fact spliting the atom with each swing.

And i would totally love this , if i wanted to play Diablo ... and was a 10 year old with Attention issues , all strung out on Mountain Dew .

But im not that guy , i was the adult that loved the first game , not the child A.D.D target audience this game is for.

It's not even Dragon Age. I mean
if you take out the size of the world , limit motion to narrow arcade like paths, drop all of the races , and change up all of the art work , change the game mechanics camera angles and fighting, and textures.

Oh crap i think i just described changing everything about the game.
And yet still call it Dragon Age and the people who loved the first will buy it anyway.

Sad that so many are so easliy played for morons.

To those who are interested , i have a bag full of gold ill sell you for a deal .
8 bucks.

I know it looks like sand , but it isn't it's just gold .
We streamlined it down the periodic table, the number was quite high , we lowered it to make it easy to remember.
Then we remade the gold look into a muted sandy color to make it consistent with the rest of the earth colors.
And the bag seemed heavy , so we made it lighter by not using gold.

But the Bag says "Gold" , so there it is a Bag of Gold , 8$ , wow what a deal im so excited at the possibility of buying it.

And you can too 8$ bag of gold , if you buy it early , we will include a bag of manure labeled Diamonds too ,,, FREE!!!

No don't compare DA2's subpar action combat system to Diablo's, DA2 can't compete and shouldn't even be in the Action RPG genre.

[In Exile]

soteria wrote...
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.

If you're building a machine (and not including monitor costs) then you're essentially playing the same shell game you accused the other person of.

[Merced652]

lol some bro is in this thread talking about 1500 pcs and replacing every 3 years LOLOL.

[Anathemic]

Merced652 wrote...

lol some bro is in this thread talking about 1500 pcs and replacing every 3 years LOLOL.

Hm? My PC was was less than 800 (Moniter, Windows 7, Keyboard, Speakers, Mouse, already have) and I consider it a high end PC atleast on the very minimum. I can run games on max settings and ultra on SC2 even on Ladder games (SC2 is serious business).