167 réponses à ce sujet

[Tirigon]

Lukertin wrote...

Oblivion and Fallout3 were two of my favorite games on the 360.  No mods.  y u mad?

I´m not "mad", you can play and like whatever you want, why would I care?

It´s just, Fallout3 sucks and Oblivion sucks on console (yes I actually got it both on PC and Xbox....)
Admittedly, though, if you don´t own the PC version you can´t know. The thing about Oblivion is, if you play it the first time, it seems epic. Then you get some mods to prolong the epicness, then some more, then even more......
And, at one time you end up with like 15 gigabyte of mods installed.

So, then, you play something else because even Oblivion gets boring after 2 years......

And if you THEN go back to playing without mods a year later, you will realize just how sh!tty the vanilla really is.


It´s like having never seen the sun because you´ve lived in a cell all your life, and then you get out, and then you get back and only THEN you can realize how much artificial light sucks.

[F-C]

how can people honestly think oblivion was a good game?

jump in place for hours to raise acrobatics!!!
run against a wall for hours to raise athletics!!!

every skill in the game was like that... and you had to micro-manage ALL of your skill-ups each level or your character ended up being weak...

i would honestly rate Oblivion as one of the worst RPG games ive ever played.

i never once felt like i enjoyed playing the game, not a single time, because all i was ever doing was micro-managing my level ups the entire time... its just beyond dumb.



so yeah, when people tout Oblivion as one of the best ever, they pretty much lose all credibility to me.




anyways, as far as DA2 goes, it can be a lot of fun if you accept it for what it is.

it is not DAO, or a continuation of DAO.

its more like "Mass Effect 2.5 : The Time Warp"

and yeah i was really disappointed at first, but once i got over it and accepted the game for what it was, i actually really enjoyed playing my rogue through the game.

Modifié par F-C, 20 mars 2011 - 03:10 .

[thegreateski]

Veex wrote...

In a nutshell for the "TLDR" crowd. If you like the game, your opinion is wrong and you're just a sheep. You can't defend a game you like because the OP thinks it was bad and demands better!

Thanks very much.

[Gatt9]

Il Divo wrote...

Gleym wrote...

Odd, considering that Bethesda fans defend Fallout 3 and Bethesda about as much as you guys defend DA2 and Bioware. Incidentally, the general response towards all the hate Fallout 3 got from fans of the original two games was also dismissed as 'whiny old gamers who can't move with the times' and any negative views 'shouldn't be listened to because they don't know what they're talking about' or 'if you don't like it, don't play it, gawd!'

I imagine that much of DA2's 'greatness' is the exact same as Fallout 3's: Tons of hype, game-site advertising out the *ss, and plenty of buyer's remorse backing those defending it so violently.

This is somewhat interesting since most fans would respond in kind when told that something they enjoy is 'bad'. Simply look at the Baldur's Gate thread. If I were to criticize Baldur's Gate II, I somehow doubt most people would be very accepting of that criticism.

It's also funny since your bias is very clear; often times, those criticizing DA2 are about as violent as those defending it.

The problem was,  the only fans at the time were the Fallout 1/2 fans.  The people cheerleading Bethseda weren't fans of Fallout 3 because there was no Fallout 3 yet. 

What it actually is,  is a message board tactic.  If you cannot deal with your opponents arguement,  find a way to attack the poster claiming that he is somehow "Undesireable",  and try to force them into shunning through attributing negative qualities.

Fallout 3 defenders wanted to ride the "FPS/TPS is the only way to make a game,  nothing else sells!" bandwagon.  But they could not deal with the counterarguements regarding Isometric or TB gameplay.  Specifically,  "Civilization sells quite well,  Pokemon has sold more units than all of Bethseda's games combined". 

So rather than attack the arguement,  they attacked the poster to try to shame them out of the arguement.

It's similiar to what occurs here.  People want to insist that ME2 and DA2 are somehow better,  yet they do not want to deal with the fact that ME and DAO outsold ME2 and looks to outsell DA2.  So rather than attack the arguements for why,  they instead assert that there's something wrong with the poster.

A series fans will always be willing to deal with criticism,  what they don't want to hear is that the path the game is taking is not right.  Most especially with RPGs,  because there seems to be a ton of people who want an "I'm an RPG Player" badge but actually hate RPGs.  A number of them obviously are seeking a game with a story,  which is generally lacking in other genres,  but I really don't get why they demand RPGs play like some other game instead of demanding the other game actually implements a story.

[djackson75]

[quote]djackson75 wrote...

I hate Oblivion.

I've never installed a mod in my life.

[/quote]

See? My point exactly. If you had done, you´d love it.
[/quote]

No, I'd still hate it.. The only mod that could make me like that game would be a mod that turns it into a game that isn't anything like Oblivion.

[panamakira]

Tirigon wrote...

panamakira wrote...

Ehh~ I like the game fine. It has a higher replay value than DA:O and the combat is so much more fun than DA:O for me.

Tastes differ.
I suppose if you search long enough you´d find people telling you that eartworms taste waaaay better than pizza.....

And it's not my place to say they're wrong in liking earthworms better than pizza. As you said, tastes differ. Everybody has different preference when it comes to the games they like. So any argument telling me the game I enjoy is crap is truly irrelavant for those who find it fun.

[Sidney]

Gatt9 wrote...
A series fans will always be willing to deal with criticism,  what they don't want to hear is that the path the game is taking is not right.  Most especially with RPGs,  because there seems to be a ton of people who want an "I'm an RPG Player" badge but actually hate RPGs.  A number of them obviously are seeking a game with a story,  which is generally lacking in other genres,  but I really don't get why they demand RPGs play like some other game instead of demanding the other game actually implements a story.

No, you are wrong. The problem is that people like you assume that there is "a" RPG. You ignore the diversity of the genre. I've seen all sorts of critiques of DA2 in philosophical terms - not things like bugs or re-used environments- and most of them fail when applied to many other games. DA2 doesn't allow more than 1 race...neither did PST or FO. No isometric camera! Oops, Morrowind, KoTOR didn't have it either. It doesn't have enough skills - yet it has more than BG2 or FO1/2 ever had. 

Plenty of other genres have stories in games: AC, Bioshock, Res Evil, Alan Wake all have a story so story isn't what is lacking in games but the chance to interact with a story is.

What you are seeing is that a lot of us care about player interaction with the story and a player character and not a played character. All the other mechnics the RPG luddites cling to really are optional to the genre. I can tolerate more vendor trash-centric looting mechanisms (I played the heck out nof ME1 and DAO with their awful inventory systems) but if someone wants to explore a non-inventory option it isn't a catastrophic problem.

[Il Divo]

Gatt9 wrote...

The problem was,  the only fans at the time were the Fallout 1/2 fans.  The people cheerleading Bethseda weren't fans of Fallout 3 because there was no Fallout 3 yet. 

What it actually is,  is a message board tactic.  If you cannot deal with your opponents arguement,  find a way to attack the poster claiming that he is somehow "Undesireable",  and try to force them into shunning through attributing negative qualities.

And yet, it's nothing original. On an anonymous internet forum, you are always going to find people who embrace assinine tactics. I was a huge fan of Morrowind, and I spent a year arguing against the pro-Oblivion crowd. And want to know what I noticed? For all I wanted to claim that Morrowind was the more intelligent game, there were just as many idiots who failed at defending it as there were Oblivion fan boys.

These forums are no different. It's not the intellectual Origins fans vs. the console fans (as Gleym would like us to believe). It's idiot A vs. idiot B, which is something most people are unwilling to accept.

It's similiar to what occurs here.  People want to insist that ME2 and DA2 are somehow better,  yet they do not want to deal with the fact that ME and DAO outsold ME2 and looks to outsell DA2.  So rather than attack the arguements for why,  they instead assert that there's something wrong with the poster.

Not entirely accurate, since Mass Effect 2 out-sold Mass Effect, according to most estimates I've seen.  

A series fans will always be willing to deal with criticism,  what they don't want to hear is that the path the game is taking is not right. 

Which is still no different for any RPG fan. If I were to sit here and argue that Kotor was a step backward for RPGs, I'd have a million and one different idiots on me about it. The issue is simple: people defend what they love. The difference is that here Dragon Age 2 is on the defense as the 'dumbed down' game. In reality, every Bioware game since Baldur's Gate has dealt with its own share of criticsm. Neverwinter Nights was a dumbed down Baldur's Gate. Jade Empire was a dumbed down Kotor. Mass Effect was a dumbed down Kotor. It never ends.

Most especially with RPGs,  because there seems to be a ton of people who want an "I'm an RPG Player" badge but actually hate RPGs.  A number of them obviously are seeking a game with a story,  which is generally lacking in other genres,  but I really don't get why they demand RPGs play like some other game instead of demanding the other game actually implements a story.

RPGs are noted for providing character interactions, other genres do not. If I want a great story in an fps, I can play Half-Life 2 or Bioshock. If I want character interactions and an interactive narrative, I'm pretty much screwed since these are (typically) only found in RPGs. Games like Deus Ex being the notable exception.

There are more than enough games with story out there.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 mars 2011 - 03:46 .

[Alpha1234]

I have to agree with the OP here, though some parts of his rants were abit harsh. I too get riled up by people who, in general terms, says: "Yeah, some features were removed and there were recycled areas too. But its still Dragon Age and i love it!" <- Cant we as consumers see whats wrong here? We're basically lowering the bar on the quality of future products. The most successfull sequels are those who _expand_ on the foundation of its predecessor. A good example is Assassins Creed 2.

If i can use an analogy it would be that of buying a newer model of your car. Yes, it got less horsepower, higher fuel consumption and the back got less space, but the rev meter looks shiney and it got a neat GPS system, therefore i like it.. its still a Honda, right?" <- i think that is the wrong way to go.

[MColes]

So, unless a game is Perfect(queue the Rose-coloured goggles about Origins) then you can't like it right? You can't have lots of fun with it, or enjoy it, or even 'love' the game. No no, it has to fit someone's description of perfect. Just not the someone who likes it, cause they're bad.

[TheMadCat]

djackson75 wrote...

No, I'd still hate it.. The only mod that could make me like that game would be a mod that turns it into a game that isn't anything like Oblivion.

Good news then, quite a number of mods that make the game something other then Oblivion,

[Alpha1234]

MColes wrote...

So, unless a game is Perfect(queue the Rose-coloured goggles about Origins) then you can't like it right? You can't have lots of fun with it, or enjoy it, or even 'love' the game. No no, it has to fit someone's description of perfect. Just not the someone who likes it, cause they're bad.

Look at it this way: If 10 000 customers complain about what they as individuals didnt like, there will emerge a pattern where you can see what the majority of the complaints are about, even if each of the customers have their own idea of whats perfect. If 7800 people complained about recycled areas or silly combat based on their individual preferences of whats perfect, than it should to be taken seriously.

[Il Divo]

TheMadCat wrote...

Good news then, quite a number of mods that make the game something other then Oblivion,

Midas Magic + Obscuro's Oblivion Overhaul = win. Mathematics for the win.

[tdawg7669]

Alpha1234 wrote...

I have to agree with the OP here, though some parts of his rants were abit harsh. I too get riled up by people who, in general terms, says: "Yeah, some features were removed and there were recycled areas too. But its still Dragon Age and i love it!" <- Cant we as consumers see whats wrong here? We're basically lowering the bar on the quality of future products. The most successfull sequels are those who _expand_ on the foundation of its predecessor. A good example is Assassins Creed 2.

If i can use an analogy it would be that of buying a newer model of your car. Yes, it got less horsepower, higher fuel consumption and the back got less space, but the rev meter looks shiney and it got a neat GPS system, therefore i like it.. its still a Honda, right?" <- i think that is the wrong way to go.

Well I feel like the improvements made to DA2 far outweighs the corners they cut in the environments.

[Alpha1234]

tdawg7669 wrote...

Alpha1234 wrote...

I have to agree with the OP here, though some parts of his rants were abit harsh. I too get riled up by people who, in general terms, says: "Yeah, some features were removed and there were recycled areas too. But its still Dragon Age and i love it!" <- Cant we as consumers see whats wrong here? We're basically lowering the bar on the quality of future products. The most successfull sequels are those who _expand_ on the foundation of its predecessor. A good example is Assassins Creed 2.

If i can use an analogy it would be that of buying a newer model of your car. Yes, it got less horsepower, higher fuel consumption and the back got less space, but the rev meter looks shiney and it got a neat GPS system, therefore i like it.. its still a Honda, right?" <- i think that is the wrong way to go.

Well I feel like the improvements made to DA2 far outweighs the corners they cut in the environments.

And i disagree. But each to their own tastes.. i didnt choose to be disappointed by the game :\\

[tdawg7669]

Thats fine that you disagree. Well not fine, I wish you enjoyed since you paid for it but I dont value your opinion any less.

My only issue is with the sentiment in the main post. I agree with his main theme that consumers should hold corporations to a high standard. However I like DA2 and I dont see it as a good example to use. I dont consider myself as a sheep throwing myself to EA to do with whatever they please.

[Travie]

tdawg7669 wrote...

Thats fine that you disagree. Well not fine, I wish you enjoyed since you paid for it but I dont value your opinion any less.

My only issue is with the sentiment in the main post. I agree with his main theme that consumers should hold corporations to a high standard. However I like DA2 and I dont see it as a good example to use. I dont consider myself as a sheep throwing myself to EA to do with whatever they please.

Maybe you should since every post from you I've read leads me to that conclusion.

Modifié par Travie, 20 mars 2011 - 04:18 .

[tdawg7669]

I just really like DA2. I havent played any bioware EA games other than Origins ME1/2 and the original Baldurs Gate and MVP baseball before 2k bought the license.

Is it so odd that I defend a game that I enjoy? I never once stated it was perfect and I actually just made a thread describing what I thought it's main flaws are.

[The Minority]

So far I've only learned that if you defend DA2, you're a fanboy.

If you insult it you're a troll.

I hate people.

[AlanC9]

Alpha1234 wrote...

Look at it this way: If 10 000 customers complain about what they as individuals didnt like, there will emerge a pattern where you can see what the majority of the complaints are about, even if each of the customers have their own idea of whats perfect. If 7800 people complained about recycled areas or silly combat based on their individual preferences of whats perfect, than it should to be taken seriously.

Sure. And then we get to the question of what you do after you take that data seriously.

People don't like recycled areas. Would they like a shorter game without recycled areas better? If not, are you better off spending more money to make more areas? Or should you just take the ratings hit?

And if some people really hate the new combat but a lot of others kinda like it, which way do you go in the future? Does it matter if the haters are a faction of your long-term fans?

[Whatever42]

One problem here is that 95% of us don't really know for sure why we like or don't like a game.

I loved Morrowind. Morrowind had awful scaling and reused a ton of areas. Sure its an older game but in many ways, it was really crappy. But there is a large hardcore fanbase for Morrowind. So instead of enjoying the game, we should have sat around writing hate letters to Bethesda for a year until they fixed everything right?

There is nothing wrong with telling a developer, hey, I wish your next game would have features A, B, and C. But the self-indulgent crying and whining and insults is incredibly silly.

But this isn't unique to gaming, of course. Everyone from 10 year olds to 90 year old whine and **** about everything from politics to McDonalds cheeseburgers. We feel if we scream and shout and insult people enough that we'll get what we want. Of course we never do, because we're insane and demand things like lots of government services and low taxes. We're lazy at work but then we whine at everyone who provides us a service for being lazy.

Frankly, the last people Bioware will listen to is us. They will listen to critics. They will listen to focus groups. They will listen to their game metrics and sales figures. Heaven help them if they try to listen to us.

[JaegerBane]

CLime wrote...

The_Eejit wrote...

If you put something like Gears Of War on the shelf, the game will appeal to pre-teens/teens and the jock/neo-rap/pubcrawler crowd's, looking for something with gore and beefy men to keep with their "hardcore" image. If you put something like civilization 3/4 or baldur's gate on the shelf, most of the new video game audience will stay away from them, calling them too deep, boring, colourful(thus "gay" in neo-frat gang terminology), and too hard.

I can't help but be repulsed by this kind of narrow-minded stereotyping.

Dragon Age 2 was made to appeal to a different fanbase than Dragon Age: Origins.  Those two groups aren't exclusive, the majority of one also belong to the other.  Unfortunately, the people on the fringes of the Venn diagram decide that the other group is somehow inferior.

Essentially, by complaining about the "jock crowd" or whatever, you become this guy.  There exist people out there who value different things in video games.  Their opinions, their preferences, and their dollars are just as valid as your own.  Don't act as if buying one videogame from a studio somehow grants you special entitlements to expect identical results from all future products.

I agree. One of my biggest concerns about whether or not the DA 'model' will be updated for worse in DA3 is that a lot of the people who are making perfectly valid criticism of the changes from DA:O and DA2 are dressing it up in all this self-important rubbish about belonging to a 'superior' group of fans who are too clever and upper crust for action games. It just makes them come across as total idiots, and hence the points being made are missed.

[Tirigon]

djackson75 wrote...

No, I'd still hate it.. The only mod that could make me like that game would be a mod that turns it into a game that isn't anything like Oblivion.

And I know at least 5 mods which do that.

Modifié par Tirigon, 20 mars 2011 - 12:44 .

[Tirigon]

F-C wrote...

jump in place for hours to raise acrobatics!!!
run against a wall for hours to raise athletics!!!

Take it as secondary skill, then:
modpcs acrobatics 95
modpcs athlethics 95
NEVER worry about the sh!t again.

every skill in the game was like that... and you had to micro-manage ALL of your skill-ups each level or your character ended up being weak...

Use a mod that allows to distribute attributes as you see fit -> never worry about leveling again.
Or cheat all skills to 100, as enemies scale to your level the game is still challenging and the most interesting part of the game is high-level anyways.

i would honestly rate Oblivion as one of the worst RPG games ive ever played.

I agree it´s more like a hack´n´slash imo.

i never once felt like i enjoyed playing the game, not a single time, because all i was ever doing was micro-managing my level ups the entire time... its just beyond dumb.

As said, plenty of ways to fix this.

Oblivion is not so much a good GAME, that´s true, but it´s the f*cking best modding ressource out there.

[Dean_the_Young]

Vilegrim wrote...


DA2 is hardly an RPG, choices matter in RPGs they don't in DA2.

When any choice you makes gets you to the same point, the same levels, and only changes the tone but not the content of anything following, nothing Bioware produces could be called an RPG.

Fallout 3 might qualify, barely, because the story missions could end up differing significantly depending on your faction... but as a whole there are no open-adventure RPG's on any video game format. Because the RPG's there are always have to fit narrow, pre-programmed allowances.

Origins couldn't count as an RPG, because the choices didn't matter to the plot. Mass Effect was never one, because the same things happened anyway.