HyperLimited wrote...
Not this again. <_<
If the old school want to rot in the past, so be it. Change is a part of life. Deal with it.
That same "someone" also bragged about how good Bioware are at the storylines and the companions, and that that is a huge point in their favor.
Meltemph wrote...
8 pages over a blogger website... I'm shocked.
As usual in this topic you have people trying their hardest to make sure everyone understands that they are not playing a "true" rpg... Because the older ones were just so deep and full of everything good in the world.
It's always funny though when you see someone one bring up Might and Magic or Ultima, you know that that is when they are just trying to make sure everyone knows that DA2 just inst hardcore like them.
Modifié par Gisle Aune, 04 mars 2011 - 04:31 .
Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
Nice post. It's something to feed my mind. I hope you are right about shifting target audience and not about becoming "evolution". So, I take it, Bioware will make Neverwinter Nights 3 or something very similar to Neverwinter Nights for "old school" fans?LdyShayna wrote...
BobSmith101 wrote...
DA2's combat is right out of Baldurs Gate:Dark Alliance and it's ilk. Champions of Norath etc. etc. It's hardly new.
I would say this is the only thing I would emphasize in this discussion. 'Evolve or die' type arguments don't make any sense, as most of the changes made between DA: O and DA2 are NOT brand new ideas. It isn't about evolution, it's about shifting target audiences. There are certainly still arguments to be made in favor of DA2 while keeping this in mind, not the least of which is an attempt to determine the overlap of the target audiences and an attempt to analysize how many people are now well outside the target audience versus those who may be gained who wouldn't have even tried the game without the changes. I would think those arguing for the changes might find this their strongest position, rather than the relatively weak argument that this is somehow totally about "progress".
Autolycus wrote...
I personally don't see (other than upsetting a lot of people with attention defecits) why they cant have old school classic RPG game with modern graphics and technology....
Best of both worlds?
LdyShayna wrote...
HyperLimited wrote...
Not this again. <_<
If the old school want to rot in the past, so be it. Change is a part of life. Deal with it.
And again - action RPGs ALSO existed in the past. What makes one thing something that needs to "rot" and the other change towards the future?
Meltemph wrote...
That same "someone" also bragged about how good Bioware are at the storylines and the companions, and that that is a huge point in their favor.
Doesn't change the fact you are trying to claim ownership of what is a "true" rpg. Is it that hard to jsut say, I prefer "insert game here" type of RPG's? Yes, it is, because you apparently think it adds more meaning to "your" games of choice, because God forbid not everyone enjoyed those games as much as you did.
Rawgrim wrote...
Going to burst a bubble here. Since the d&d licensing comes with an adamant clause that the game company must use the current rulesystem of d&d when making games based on their ruleset, they will have to use 4th edition. Wich is basically d&d for dummies. Skillpoints are gone etc, and everything is set up like skill-trees like in the Diablo games
Rawgrim wrote...
Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
Nice post. It's something to feed my mind. I hope you are right about shifting target audience and not about becoming "evolution". So, I take it, Bioware will make Neverwinter Nights 3 or something very similar to Neverwinter Nights for "old school" fans?LdyShayna wrote...
BobSmith101 wrote...
DA2's combat is right out of Baldurs Gate:Dark Alliance and it's ilk. Champions of Norath etc. etc. It's hardly new.
I would say this is the only thing I would emphasize in this discussion. 'Evolve or die' type arguments don't make any sense, as most of the changes made between DA: O and DA2 are NOT brand new ideas. It isn't about evolution, it's about shifting target audiences. There are certainly still arguments to be made in favor of DA2 while keeping this in mind, not the least of which is an attempt to determine the overlap of the target audiences and an attempt to analysize how many people are now well outside the target audience versus those who may be gained who wouldn't have even tried the game without the changes. I would think those arguing for the changes might find this their strongest position, rather than the relatively weak argument that this is somehow totally about "progress".
Going to burst a bubble here. Since the d&d licensing comes with an adamant clause that the game company must use the current rulesystem of d&d when making games based on their ruleset, they will have to use 4th edition. Wich is basically d&d for dummies. Skillpoints are gone etc, and everything is set up like skill-trees like in the Diablo games
On contrary, I love them very much.Elsariel wrote...
Autolycus wrote...
I personally don't see (other than upsetting a lot of people with attention defecits) why they cant have old school classic RPG game with modern graphics and technology....
Best of both worlds?
Well.... honestly, I'm kinda done with turn-based combat. I've been there and done that for years... decades, even. I'm ready to move on.
Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
Nice post. It's something to feed my mind. I hope you are right about shifting target audience and not about becoming "evolution". So, I take it, Bioware will make Neverwinter Nights 3 or something very similar to Neverwinter Nights for "old school" fans?
Merced652 wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
Nice post. It's something to feed my mind. I hope you are right about shifting target audience and not about becoming "evolution". So, I take it, Bioware will make Neverwinter Nights 3 or something very similar to Neverwinter Nights for "old school" fans?LdyShayna wrote...
BobSmith101 wrote...
DA2's combat is right out of Baldurs Gate:Dark Alliance and it's ilk. Champions of Norath etc. etc. It's hardly new.
I would say this is the only thing I would emphasize in this discussion. 'Evolve or die' type arguments don't make any sense, as most of the changes made between DA: O and DA2 are NOT brand new ideas. It isn't about evolution, it's about shifting target audiences. There are certainly still arguments to be made in favor of DA2 while keeping this in mind, not the least of which is an attempt to determine the overlap of the target audiences and an attempt to analysize how many people are now well outside the target audience versus those who may be gained who wouldn't have even tried the game without the changes. I would think those arguing for the changes might find this their strongest position, rather than the relatively weak argument that this is somehow totally about "progress".
Going to burst a bubble here. Since the d&d licensing comes with an adamant clause that the game company must use the current rulesystem of d&d when making games based on their ruleset, they will have to use 4th edition. Wich is basically d&d for dummies. Skillpoints are gone etc, and everything is set up like skill-trees like in the Diablo games
Which is funny and ironic. Even Wizard's is like 'oh jesus we have to dumb this **** down to get new fans.'
Are you trying to say Ultima wasn't an RPG,
or that DA2 is even half the rpg ultima was?
In ultima you didn't have flashy combat and VO, so your character was your character. In addition to that your story was largely your story. I mean don't get me wrong here i love me some roller-coasters, but if i wanted to ride on rails or watch a movie while riding on rails i'd take my phone with me to six flags.
Modifié par Meltemph, 04 mars 2011 - 04:38 .
That makes sense. However, there is a relation to progress. Instead of dreaming up a solution for both audiences and/or coming up with innovative ideas to steal their hearts it seems that BioWare's solution is simplification, streamlining or dumbing down (whatever you prefer to call it) and embrace an action combat system which only one group likes. So, to me that means that your observation about the shifting is right, but that also means that the other group won't be happy. That could have been avoided.LdyShayna wrote...
I would say this is the only thing I would emphasize in this discussion. 'Evolve or die' type arguments don't make any sense, as most of the changes made between DA: O and DA2 are NOT brand new ideas. It isn't about evolution, it's about shifting target audiences. There are certainly still arguments to be made in favor of DA2 while keeping this in mind, not the least of which is an attempt to determine the overlap of the target audiences and an attempt to analysize how many people are now well outside the target audience versus those who may be gained who wouldn't have even tried the game without the changes. I would think those arguing for the changes might find this their strongest position, rather than the relatively weak argument that this is somehow totally about "progress".BobSmith101 wrote...
DA2's combat is right out of Baldurs Gate:Dark Alliance and it's ilk. Champions of Norath etc. etc. It's hardly new.
I actually wish this would happend, the problem is the amount of money companies spend on graphics/physics engines and all that garbage is so high now, that they need huge sales to compensate for the costs of just making these games. So they change mechanics to make them fun for a wider audience of people while trying to maintain the elements their original audience loved, not an easy task and inevitably some end up feeling alienated.Autolycus wrote...
I personally don't see (other than upsetting a lot of people with attention defecits) why they cant have old school classic RPG game with modern graphics and technology....
Best of both worlds?
Modifié par Lordless, 04 mars 2011 - 04:39 .
Autolycus wrote...
I personally don't see (other than upsetting a lot of people with attention defecits) why they cant have old school classic RPG game with modern graphics and technology....
Best of both worlds?
Meltemph wrote...
Are you trying to say Ultima wasn't an RPG,
As usual Merced tries to hard. When did I insinuate Utima isnt a RPG? Oh, that is right I didn't you just can't think of anything worthwile to say.or that DA2 is even half the rpg ultima was?
Ultima, I never thought was that great of a game. Fun for its time, when I played it, enjoyable enough, but as an interactive medium of a game, was very flat. I'm not going to get into the argument of how quantifiable amount a RPG must be to be considered a true RPG, because I don't need that much reasurence about a game I do or do not like.In ultima you didn't have flashy combat and VO, so your character was your character. In addition to that your story was largely your story. I mean don't get me wrong here i love me some roller-coasters, but if i wanted to ride on rails or watch a movie while riding on rails i'd take my phone with me to six flags.
Oh, so witty.
You character was more your character in Ultima becasue it had to be, there wasn't much there, added to the fact that I'm not a fan of Richard Garriott's story telling by any means. Sandbox RPG's are only as good as the world you are put in and most worlds you are put in are horrible, with sandboxes.
Not ever game has to be like those to be rpg's and the only reason you wan't to paint DA2 or anything else as "lesser" RPG's is because you are desperate for people to recognize your superior "taste" in RPG's.
Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
On contrary, I love them very much.
haha did you ever play ADOM? that game was hardcore.moilami wrote...
Autolycus wrote...
I personally don't see (other than upsetting a lot of people with attention defecits) why they cant have old school classic RPG game with modern graphics and technology....
Best of both worlds?
I could take anyday old school classic RPG with modern graphics. Graphics are just graphics. They only help you to visual your surroundings. In my favorit RPG (popularly called as roguelike) graphics are so bad and the game so complex and difficult that maybe 95% people here would outright refuse to play it. Lets take a look how it looks.
That is very fine game and I can't really tell why it should have awesum (sic) graphics. Or well, masses would refuse to play it without. So lets make better graphics. But masses would still refuse to play it because it is too difficult and complex. Lets dumb it down for masses. Now that's a win! We have Diablo.
Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
On contrary, I love them very much.Elsariel wrote...
Autolycus wrote...
I personally don't see (other than upsetting a lot of people with attention defecits) why they cant have old school classic RPG game with modern graphics and technology....
Best of both worlds?
Well.... honestly, I'm kinda done with turn-based combat. I've been there and done that for years... decades, even. I'm ready to move on.
Rawgrim wrote...
Meltemph wrote...
Are you trying to say Ultima wasn't an RPG,
As usual Merced tries to hard. When did I insinuate Utima isnt a RPG? Oh, that is right I didn't you just can't think of anything worthwile to say.or that DA2 is even half the rpg ultima was?
Ultima, I never thought was that great of a game. Fun for its time, when I played it, enjoyable enough, but as an interactive medium of a game, was very flat. I'm not going to get into the argument of how quantifiable amount a RPG must be to be considered a true RPG, because I don't need that much reasurence about a game I do or do not like.In ultima you didn't have flashy combat and VO, so your character was your character. In addition to that your story was largely your story. I mean don't get me wrong here i love me some roller-coasters, but if i wanted to ride on rails or watch a movie while riding on rails i'd take my phone with me to six flags.
Oh, so witty.
You character was more your character in Ultima becasue it had to be, there wasn't much there, added to the fact that I'm not a fan of Richard Garriott's story telling by any means. Sandbox RPG's are only as good as the world you are put in and most worlds you are put in are horrible, with sandboxes.
Not ever game has to be like those to be rpg's and the only reason you wan't to paint DA2 or anything else as "lesser" RPG's is because you are desperate for people to recognize your superior "taste" in RPG's.
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.
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.
Retour en haut