1216 réponses à ce sujet

[Graunt]

For those living in some alternate reality where an $800 PC is "top of the line" or that even $1000 will "run at max settings" (sure, key word "run" not remain playable and you aren't even factoring resolutions).

www.tomshardware.com/reviews/build-a-pc-overclock-ssd,2820.html

And before someone says something as ignorant as "Don't use that site to build your system!", I don't, it's just for comparison purposes.

GeForce GTX 460s are fairly solid performers, even when compared to GTX
470s, yet the price difference is huge. Saving even more money on a
dual-core processor gives the $1000 machine even better value, since
most games can’t utilize more than two execution cores. If gaming is
what you really want, load times don’t mean much to you, and you like
the performance seen in the $1000 build’s debut, this is probably the machine for you.

Just a reminder for those that missed it the first two times: my current machine that was built at the end of 2009 that I paid over $1,500 for would cost right around $1,000 today. It also has similar/better performance than the one listed in this guide, yet is quite a bit under the $2,000 system.  This also doesn't include the cost of a monitor. (But of course "I already had one, and mine last forever!" will probably come up).

Modifié par Graunt, 07 mars 2011 - 07:00 .

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

Grunk wrote...

Aurgelmir wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

ceski wrote...

This video sums up how Dragon Age 2 represents everything wrong with the video game industry today.

A complete shame.

That video tells us exactly nothing....

So I take it you can't remember when games used to be something other than a marketing tool, aimed at the lowest common denominator with a wallet.

How dare they take advantage of current trends to try to make money and change the game from something you like to something slightly different! Those money-grubbing, capitalist bastards! Luckily, you don't believe in games being made for money and are starting a company that gives out games for free. Or maybe you're working with the government to start a kind of welfare system for video games?

My point is that what you're saying is stupid. It's fine to dislike it, but all of this stuff that you're saying is hilariously dramatic. It's somewhat different and I guess you don't like DLC or pushing buttons. Sadly, DLC is the most direct revenue stream for developers, so I expect that to get pretty popular, and pushing buttons doesn't make a game less strategic, especially when an auto-attack option is included.

You can tell when its artistic. You can tell when its driven by passions and you can tell when its driven by the market and by dollars.

 Remember when the developers from Irrational Games first stated talking about Bioshock. Nobody knew what a Big Daddy or a Little Sister was. It really sounded stupid but if you listened you could hear their passion. 
They talked about these Big Daddies like they were their life's work. Bioshock wasn't the most marketable concept at all. A lot of people didnt know what to make of it. Then they released the demo.  It turned out there was something to be passionate about. Big Daddy's weren't just bosses with lots of hp. They had some solid AI. and there were many ways to take them down or use them to fight for you. 

[Morroian]

Dorian the Monk of Sune wrote...

You can tell when its artistic. You can tell when its driven by passions and you can tell when its driven by the market and by dollars.

The devs seem quite passionate.

[Davasar]

The article expresses and proves all the things I've been saying for months.

Feels great.

[skyrend]

I still don't understand why the iso view was removed. I remember reading something a while ago about how they wanted players to appreciate the ceiling and environment design, but the graphics in this game are not very remarkable.

And if they're going to move the gameplay towards action RPG, why not make the PC version have a gamepad option as well?

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

Morroian wrote...

Dorian the Monk of Sune wrote...

You can tell when its artistic. You can tell when its driven by passions and you can tell when its driven by the market and by dollars.

The devs seem quite passionate.

Yep passionate enough to quit. 
http://blog.brentkno...08-summer-2009/

Really I see more passion from Silverman. This guy is wild.  

[darklordpocky-san]

sounds more like a complaint on variation.

Some series evolve differently than others. Dragon Quest evolves to better utilize it's strengths, and strengthen the classical approach. Final Fantasy is going crazy, and I'd rather not talk about the abomination that is FFXIII, but it's the example of radical evolution; in which the series keeps changing, but with no clear intent on improvement. Then there's Bioware. This one is tricky, as they seem to want to streamline every game for marketability's sake, and in turn they tear down a lot of classical RPG elements that held their games above ground. They succeeded with ME2, in that it still played great, but really didn't feel RPG enough for most, and I have no clue where we're going with DA2.

Lastly, I'd like to point out that I love RPGs in almost all forms. Action, Turn-based Strategy, Traditional, whatever. I've grown to love a lot of styles, and a lot of variations on the formula. classical RPGs are still being made, but they're just not what's "in" at the moment. Go look around, past all the AAA hyped games, and you'll see that the love for old-school RPGs can be found elsewhere. While it's sad to see a company change things to appeal to wider audiences over their original base fans, it does say that they are trying to make more people players, and that sometimes can help.

[CitizenThom]

Graunt wrote...

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.

Like old episodes of tv shows, or movies that I especially enjoy the underpinning themes to, so long as I have a machine that will let me re-experience them, it is inevitable that I will replay them. I also re-read books, for what it's worth.

Granted, I've re-watched every movie in my collection at least twice (save for those Ive purchased recently obviously... ) and most have been watched four or five times. Not to get too esoteric or mystical, an individual really does change over time, even if it's only in small degrees. The slightest shift in perspective can reveal new experiences in the consumption of aesthetic and intellectual material, sometimes trigger brand new imaginations, sometimes tell you something that you needed to hear on the one day that it was told to you.

And yes, I think there are plenty of games that next year, or the year after that will be worth a new spin. Strange coincidence in that many of those games are of the 12-20 hours of gameplay variety... although there are a few 30 hour plus gameplay games that I mean to revisit once I've finihed off the most recent addition to the game library.

[didymos1120]

Dorian the Monk of Sune wrote...

Yep passionate enough to quit. 
http://blog.brentkno...08-summer-2009/

All one of him.  And yes, I know what his postion was.  Not relevant to what all the very numerous other devs feel about the game they've actually worked on, and the game Knowles didn't.

Modifié par didymos1120, 07 mars 2011 - 07:44 .

[Elthraim]

Hmm, the Brent Knowles blog was interesting, but having watched Laidlaw play through the demo and the second live segment (and having played the demo several times with each class) I can't say that I agree with either the initial article this post is about or Knowles's opinion on the direction of DA2.

On a much less interesting scale, I too have heard rumblings of changes at my workplace and over-reacted on a massive scale. It happens. Wait until you actually see how something turns out before judging it as a horrendous calamity.

In terms of the 'action-RPG-ruining-the-RPG-genre' business, I'd like to point to a poster above who compared DA:O to Command and Conquer and Civilization. If the devs for DA:O knew that someone felt the game came off like an RTS I can see why they would try to speed up the sequel.

Let's not panic, here, folks. There is still tactical combat, there is still character customization, this is not a straight-forward action RPG. Sure it's a story on rails rather than in a sandbox, but so was DA:O. And, as someone who heartily enjoyed games like Baldur's Gate, NWN, KotOR, and even Final Fantasy Tactics, DA:O's combat *was* slow. It just was. Play a 2-handed weapon-wielding warrior again or a dual-wielding rogue and see how fluid and exciting the combat is.

The devs loved  DA:O as much as you or I, and they're trying to make the sequel more enjoyable for themselves as much as us.

Modifié par Elthraim, 07 mars 2011 - 08:00 .

[Seggalion]

I have to agree with the article. Like it or not, it happened in ME2 and in DA2, and that is rpg elements being phased out. I am a big fan of the crpg genre, but Bioware is slowly (or quickly?) moving away from its roots. It wasnt JUST about story, it was also being able to develop your character in a unique way. This has been gutted and the game is now much more like your run of the mill action game (albeit, still good) - but it is disheartening for me to see the great thing about their games - options with character development and detail - removed for the standard/boring you have 3 classes and we will tell you how each plays and thats how they will play.

For some the "options" given in the game will be argued as "options" - not in comparison to what we use to have.  This really has to do with character development (skills, etc, and how I want them to fight) versus anything else for me.  

From what I can see DA2 was heavily Mass Effect 2ized. Dont get me wrong, I love ME and ME2, but watching that now shift into DA to the point of gutting more rpg character detail development elements was not what I wanted.  Conversation wheel and dialogue - cool.  Taking away my ability to create an interesting character skill wise, etc, not cool.  And no, I do not consider what was provided to be as anywhere near diverse as what Bioware provided in DA:O or its prior games.

Thats my 2 cents. Bioware's direction has changed and I dont see them going back. The only way that will happen is if sales drop.

Modifié par Seggalion, 07 mars 2011 - 08:22 .

[Aermas]

I really like this article & I hope Bioware will return to a cRPG.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Dorian the Monk of Sune wrote...

So far we agree on nothing when it comes to Mass Effect. I prefered 2's combat though I miss the statistical influance

The loss of the stats made a huge difference.  Suddenly in ME2 Shepard was a crask shot who could hit literally anything he wanted as long as he had a line of sight.  Shepard never missed.

and thought the dialog system was the best thing it had going.

My opinion of ME2's dialogue system is well known.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Graunt wrote...

Hey, guess what?  A three year old computer is not going to be able to run a current game at max settings

Neither is a console, so I don't see how that's at all relevant (I realise you're responding to a contrary claim).  Those "max settings" you're talking about aren't even available on the console.

Vaeliorin wrote...

Sir-Tech has only been gone for 8 years, technically (10 years since they last put out a game.)  Still, they're my favorite old school developer/publisher, and I never pass on a chance to bring them up.

10 years?  Has it been that long since Wizardry 8?

How time flies.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 07 mars 2011 - 08:38 .

[CroGamer002]

Wow, this article is just full of garbage.

[Graunt]

Seggalion wrote...

I have to agree with the article. Like it or not, it happened in ME2 and in DA2, and that is rpg elements being phased out. I am a big fan of the crpg genre, but Bioware is slowly (or quickly?) moving away from its roots. It wasnt JUST about story, it was also being able to develop your character in a unique way. This has been gutted and the game is now much more like your run of the mill action game (albeit, still good) - but it is disheartening for me to see the great thing about their games - options with character development and detail - removed for the standard/boring you have 3 classes and we will tell you how each plays and thats how they will play.

For some the "options" given in the game will be argued as "options" - not in comparison to what we use to have.  This really has to do with character development (skills, etc, and how I want them to fight) versus anything else for me.  

From what I can see DA2 was heavily Mass Effect 2ized. Dont get me wrong, I love ME and ME2, but watching that now shift into DA to the point of gutting more rpg character detail development elements was not what I wanted.  Conversation wheel and dialogue - cool.  Taking away my ability to create an interesting character skill wise, etc, not cool.  And no, I do not consider what was provided to be as anywhere near diverse as what Bioware provided in DA:O or its prior games.

Thats my 2 cents. Bioware's direction has changed and I dont see them going back. The only way that will happen is if sales drop.

Mass Effect 2 was the superior game overall though, despite the issues I had with it.  I loved Mass Effect, and had the most fun with biotics, but outside of that, the combat was really boring.  The Mako missions were terrible, especially on any of "those" planets and made quite a few of my OCD planet drops unbearable.

[didymos1120]

Elthraim wrote...

Hmm, the Brent Knowles blog was interesting, but having watched Laidlaw play through the demo and the second live segment (and having played the demo several times with each class) I can't say that I agree with either the initial article this post is about or Knowles's opinion on the direction of DA2.

On a much less interesting scale, I too have heard rumblings of changes at my workplace and over-reacted on a massive scale. It happens. Wait until you actually see how something turns out before judging it as a horrendous calamity.

Knowles didn't really say it was some sort of calamity, and it's clear he didn't quit over DA2.  It just wasn't (as he thought at the time the intial discussions on the game were happening) the sort of game design he wanted to work with. As he writes, his actual decision to quit came much later, when there wasn't something else for him to work on at Bioware. 

He does seem to have gotten the wrong idea about some things in DA2 though.  Namely, he cites lack of party control as a factor, but that's essentially unchanged from DA:O. 

I can't say for sure whether he had the wrong idea about how predefined Hawke was going to be, because I don't know what standard he was using to judge it by, and neither I nor anyone else here knows exactly how much freedom we're going to have in shaping Hawke.  Based on what I've seen,  I don't see Hawke as any more constrained than any given origin in Origins.

Maybe that was the problem:  he prefers those couple extra degrees of freedoms Origins offered.  But given how cosmetic those things were after the actual origin sections were done, I have trouble seeing why that's such a problem.

Modifié par didymos1120, 07 mars 2011 - 08:51 .

[AnathamaDye]

panamakira wrote...

Ugh....another article of those.....Again, it's my preference and personal opinion and I don't necessarily agree with that article. I don't want to play Origins v2.0. Maybe you guys do, I don't.

enough said ♥

[hexaligned]

JohnEpler wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

Or maybe you like to paint DA2 as a fantastic game, to make everyone see how superior YOUR taste is, and in the process painting older rpgs as "lesser" rpgs.

I'm not the one trying to tell everyone what is wrong with DA2, and no where did I mention how much better or worse DA2 is. My point was, you can't come into a topic claiming another game did it better, when it only did it better because you liked it more.

Forgive me for not being a Ultima fan though.

I was merely listing up stuff in DA2, that was relevant to why the article in question, felt rpgs were in decline. Lack of choices being removed etc, an compared it to older games. Never said DA2 was better or worse.

its ok not to be a fan of Ultima, mate. Personally I can`t stand the older ones. Or the last two, for that matter.

Ultima VII was the best Ultima, anyways.

This is scientific fact. I have charts.

Other than UO (pre-PVE world), agreed, and I played that game when I was 9, and prefered it to the button mashers that were out at the time, and still do prefer that type of game.  This isn't a case of "evolution" it's not like DA2 is the first action RPG to ever be released, those have been out for decades.  I would much prefer if Bioware DID try to evolve the genre in new directions, I like my strategic RPG's, but they do get stale.  Given the choice between a generic strategy RPG, and a generic action RPG, I'll always pick the former though.

[ErebUs890]

lol I dare you all to try and play on nightmare mode as if you were playing an action game. Doubt you'll get far. The game is basically the same as Origins, with a few tweaks that it needed to get more than just the classic RPG fans in to the DA world. People need to realize that it's not an action game. If DA2 is an action game, than I guess KOTOR was an action game too, right?

Modifié par ErebUs890, 07 mars 2011 - 09:04 .

[AlanC9]

What's the definition of action-RPG? Is there one?

[hexaligned]

AlanC9 wrote...

What's the definition of action-RPG? Is there one?

Well I have MY definition, which is the only one that matters, (to me).

[Buffy-Summers]

AlanC9 wrote...

What's the definition of action-RPG? Is there one?

I would say this fits the bill to a T

Action role-playing games form a loosely-defined sub-genre of role-playing video games that incorporate elements of action or action-adventure games, emphasizing real-time action that requires direct input from the player, instead of turn-based or menu-based combat. These games often use combat systems similar to hack and slash or shooter games.

[AlanC9]

If that's the definition then I don't see how DA2 is any more of an action-RPG than DAO was, unless the player chooses to play that way.

[Aurgelmir]

Buffy-Summers wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

What's the definition of action-RPG? Is there one?

I would say this fits the bill to a T

Action role-playing games form a loosely-defined sub-genre of role-playing video games that incorporate elements of action or action-adventure games, emphasizing real-time action that requires direct input from the player, instead of turn-based or menu-based combat. These games often use combat systems similar to hack and slash or shooter games.

I would agree. And I enjoy them.

But I already have Mass Effect for my ARPG needs, dragon age satiated my RPG needs. Now they want to make Dragon Effect, and I, for the first time ever, dont wan't to buy a Bioware game. I will in the end probably, but only out of loyalty to a company who have earned it...and if DA2 isn't at least passable the may very well lose it.