200 réponses à ce sujet

[chinoyray]

BobSmith101 wrote...

chinoyray wrote...

IMO... all of the repetition and change of model for DA2 is because a 23GB PC game won't fit in a single DVD for the PS3 or Xbox 360.

Dragon Age: Origins (including all DLC) is 23.4GB
Dragon Age 2 is just 6.15GB

See what consoles can do for a good PC game?

It's all about the money and selling more copies.

Xbox, you have a point. PS3, do you know what the capacity of blu ray is ? Thought not .

At least get your facts right before you start "hating".

The packaging for the PS3 is not Blu-Ray (except Collector's Edition). I know that Blu-Ray contains 25GB but apparently, EA decided that not all the PS3 packaging will still be a DVD. 

Get your facts right before you start saying something like this very line. 

Modifié par chinoyray, 20 mars 2011 - 10:24 .

[Iwasdrunkbro]

chinoyray wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

chinoyray wrote...

IMO... all of the repetition and change of model for DA2 is because a 23GB PC game won't fit in a single DVD for the PS3 or Xbox 360.

Dragon Age: Origins (including all DLC) is 23.4GB
Dragon Age 2 is just 6.15GB

See what consoles can do for a good PC game?

It's all about the money and selling more copies.

Xbox, you have a point. PS3, do you know what the capacity of blu ray is ? Thought not .

At least get your facts right before you start "hating".

The packaging for the PS3 is not Blu-Ray. I know that Blu-Ray contains 25GB but apparently, EA decided that the PS3 packaging will still be a DVD. 

Get your facts right before you start saying something like this very line. 

This game was really only 6GB? Wow. Just... wow.

[MorrigansLove]

I agree with all your points. Hopefully Bioware tries to improve on them in DA3.

[TwistedComplex]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

chinoyray wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

chinoyray wrote...

IMO... all of the repetition and change of model for DA2 is because a 23GB PC game won't fit in a single DVD for the PS3 or Xbox 360.

Dragon Age: Origins (including all DLC) is 23.4GB
Dragon Age 2 is just 6.15GB

See what consoles can do for a good PC game?

It's all about the money and selling more copies.

Xbox, you have a point. PS3, do you know what the capacity of blu ray is ? Thought not .

At least get your facts right before you start "hating".

The packaging for the PS3 is not Blu-Ray. I know that Blu-Ray contains 25GB but apparently, EA decided that the PS3 packaging will still be a DVD. 

Get your facts right before you start saying something like this very line. 

This game was really only 6GB? Wow. Just... wow.

Oblivion is only 4 GB

I don't judge a game by the size of it's files... Er...

[Iwasdrunkbro]

TwistedComplex wrote...

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

chinoyray wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

chinoyray wrote...

IMO... all of the repetition and change of model for DA2 is because a 23GB PC game won't fit in a single DVD for the PS3 or Xbox 360.

Dragon Age: Origins (including all DLC) is 23.4GB
Dragon Age 2 is just 6.15GB

See what consoles can do for a good PC game?

It's all about the money and selling more copies.

Xbox, you have a point. PS3, do you know what the capacity of blu ray is ? Thought not .

At least get your facts right before you start "hating".

The packaging for the PS3 is not Blu-Ray. I know that Blu-Ray contains 25GB but apparently, EA decided that the PS3 packaging will still be a DVD. 

Get your facts right before you start saying something like this very line. 

This game was really only 6GB? Wow. Just... wow.

Oblivion is only 4 GB

I don't judge a game by the size of it's files... Er...

Oblivion was also released almost 6 years ago.

[Dr. Impossible]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

Quake would really be your only arguement here because it was released a year before Goldeneye (I believe). Again, that is purely an oppinion on which of the 2 had more influence. I would still argue Goldeneye. Half-Life and Halo were released after Goldeneye (again if memory serves correctly regarding to Half-Life).

It makes no difference that Half-Life and Halo came after Goldeneye.

Again, I understand that Oblivion and GTA have nothing in common aside from them both being open world games. But you really cant sit there and say that GTA 3, as big as it was at the time, had no impact on future sand box type games. Its impossible.

It had no impact on Bethesda's games.

[cotheer]

I wouldn't mind open world at all, with Biowares writing, it's a double win in my opinion.
I just like the idea of exploration and finding some hidden things, ruins, treasure...
Let's face it, what is there to do in their current games, besides questing?
Not that their games are bad (well, there are exceptions ), far from that, but some sidetrack activity would be nice (exploring).
So in general, the games lack those little things that could prove to be really fun to do and as long as it is done in a PROPER way, i have no objections.

[Gadarr]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...
I simply cannot understand why throwing a bigger explorable world on top of an already great script makes the story any less than it would be. All you're doing is making the world larger. Nobody in this thread is asking to trade in the story for exploration.

Because you'd need to fill the bigger explorable world with content. I suppose it is possible to do that and still keep the player focused on the story, but the bigger the world, the more difficult it gets. And of course, it takes a whole lot more development time. If you want to combine open world with a strong narrative, you can't just copypaste some dungeons or villages all over the place, you need to fill them with meaning and story elements that connect to the other areas of the world. Otherwise, it's just pointless and actually distracting.

Take DA:O as an example: Would you have felt the urgency of your mission in any way, if you were allowed to roam the world freely and visit random farms and towns? I'd bet no. Actually, I found most of those sidequests already distracting.

Modifié par Gadarr, 20 mars 2011 - 10:33 .

[Iwasdrunkbro]

Dr. Impossible wrote...
It makes no difference that Half-Life and Halo came after Goldeneye.

It actually does make a huge difference because they in turn could have been influenced by Goldeneye especially when seperated by a year or more.

It had no impact on Bethesda's games.

Thats debatable.

[AkiKishi]

chinoyray wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

chinoyray wrote...

IMO... all of the repetition and change of model for DA2 is because a 23GB PC game won't fit in a single DVD for the PS3 or Xbox 360.

Dragon Age: Origins (including all DLC) is 23.4GB
Dragon Age 2 is just 6.15GB

See what consoles can do for a good PC game?

It's all about the money and selling more copies.

Xbox, you have a point. PS3, do you know what the capacity of blu ray is ? Thought not .

At least get your facts right before you start "hating".

The packaging for the PS3 is not Blu-Ray (except Collector's Edition). I know that Blu-Ray contains 25GB but apparently, EA decided that not all the PS3 packaging will still be a DVD. 

Get your facts right before you start saying something like this very line. 

That's not a limitation of the PS3. That's EA cost cutting.

[Iwasdrunkbro]

Gadarr wrote...

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...
I simply cannot understand why throwing a bigger explorable world on top of an already great script makes the story any less than it would be. All you're doing is making the world larger. Nobody in this thread is asking to trade in the story for exploration.

Because you'd need to fill the bigger explorable world with content. I suppose it is possible to do that and still keep the player focused on the story, but the bigger the world, the more difficult it gets. And of course, it takes a whole lot more development time. If you want to combine open world with a strong narrative, you can't just copypaste some dungeons or villages all over the place, you need to fill them with meaning and story elements that connect to the other areas of the world. Otherwise, it's just pointless and actually distracting.

I think New Vegas comes really close to something that could work. Obviously Obsidian chose to use a more Bethesda type approach, but like I said they do have some talented writers over there that made it work out. Everything seems to connect.

If Bioware were to do it Id think we'd see New Vegas + the great storylines and character developement that Bioware is known for. Done correctly, I just dont see how it could end up wrong... especially considering the mess we have on our hands with DA2.

[Xewaka]

Grand, open, sandbox worlds and a tight control of the narrative are mutually exclusive. The most open Bioware RPG was the first Baldur's Gate, and even then, certain plot points were closed off. They've been reducing the amount of exploration freedom for a tighter narrative since then.
Could they write and develop enough content to fill a sandbox with quality quest lines and main plot? They could. But the game would take a prohibitively long development cycle. If DA 2 already looks like a rush job with the enviromental recycling, the lack of ambient description for weapons, etcetera, how much more rushed and samey would it look and feel if they had to incrrease tenfold the amount of territory?

Modifié par Xewaka, 20 mars 2011 - 10:40 .

[Iwasdrunkbro]

Xewaka wrote...

Grand, open, sandbox worlds and a tight control of the narrative are mutually exclusive. The most open Bioware RPG was the first Baldur's Gate, and even then, certain plot points were closed off. They've been reducing the amount of exploration freedom for a tighter narrative since then.

I still think the two could come together with a suitable budget and production time. It would be challenging but since when did Bioware stop challening itself?

On a side note, your avatar looks like Malak. I like it.

[upsettingshorts]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

I still think the two could come together with a suitable budget and production time

I think trying to bring them together would be a mistake.  Because ultimately they're trying to do different things. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 mars 2011 - 10:42 .

[AkiKishi]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...
I think New Vegas comes really close to something that could work. Obviously Obsidian chose to use a more Bethesda type approach, but like I said they do have some talented writers over there that made it work out. Everything seems to connect.

If Bioware were to do it Id think we'd see New Vegas + the great storylines and character developement that Bioware is known for. Done correctly, I just dont see how it could end up wrong... especially considering the mess we have on our hands with DA2.

I liked NV a lot, but several times I just ignored the plot and went exploring. Completely losing motivation to "finish". Of course I more than got my value for money so I don't see that as a major negative anyway.

[BeljoraDien]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

It would be challenging but since when did Bioware stop challening itself?

2002? 2003? I can't give you an exact date.

Modifié par BeljoraDien, 20 mars 2011 - 10:45 .

[Iwasdrunkbro]

BeljoraDien wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

It would be challenging but since when did Bioware stop challening itself?

2002? 2003? I can't give you an exact date.

Quoting Failure lol.

[Dr. Impossible]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

It actually does make a huge difference because they in turn could have been influenced by Goldeneye especially when seperated by a year or more.

Going by your logic Eradicator should have been more influential than Half-Life because it came out earlier.

Thats debatable.

Again: Bethesda was making these games many years before GTA III came out. That's a fact. The only common trait between GTA and Bethesda's games is that you can freely roam an open, 3D game world.

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

Since when did Bioware stop challening itself?

Since Mass Effect. If not earlier.

Modifié par Dr. Impossible, 20 mars 2011 - 10:45 .

[Xewaka]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...
I still think the two could come together with a suitable budget and production time. It would be challenging but since when did Bioware stop challening itself?

"Suitable budget and production times" are anathema for the publishers.

[BeljoraDien]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

BeljoraDien wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

It would be challenging but since when did Bioware stop challening itself?

2002? 2003? I can't give you an exact date.

Quoting Failure lol.

If you thought that was bad, you should have seen after I 'fixed' it.

[upsettingshorts]

Heh, like there's any way whatsover that a BSN user wouldn't answer "when did Bioware stop challenging itself" with the year of whatever game they subjectively disliked was released.  What an absurd premise and question.

It would make more sense, in being critical of Dragon Age 2 (or anything else), to say that they challenged themselves and failed than to say they didn't challenge themselves at all. Especially considering that the biggest complaints are over changes, not things that remained the same.

And it's not as if people don't complain when things stay the same either, the Total War Center has been complaining about the poor reinforcement mechanic for years. And guess what's back in Shogun 2? The same bad reinforcement mechanic. Maybe they should have "challenged themselves."

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 mars 2011 - 10:48 .

[AkiKishi]

Dr. Impossible wrote...
Since Mass Effect. If not earlier.

Mass Effect was supposed to be an entry level RPG for the 360 anyway. Maybe it made them realise they could get by "phoning it in" though.

Jade Empire was much the same thing for Xbox.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 20 mars 2011 - 10:48 .

[Iwasdrunkbro]

Dr. Impossible wrote...
Again: Bethesda was making these games many years before GTA III came out. That's a fact. The only common trait between GTA and Bethesda's games is that you can freely roam an open, 3D game world.

YES! and thats the only thing im trying to argue here.

Le Sigh.

The only thing Im trying to point out is that GTA3 really lit that spark... you know what I give up. I dont wish to argue with you anymore. Im drunk. Im happy. And Im done. You win.




damnit quotation failure. karma..

Modifié par Iwasdrunkbro, 20 mars 2011 - 10:50 .

[rumination888]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...
Lets be honest here, the model on how Bioware games are made hasn't really changed much since, well... ever? 

...you do realize that the model Bethesda uses for their games are even older than the model that BioWare uses for theirs, right?

Having BioWare change their cinematic model for that of a sandbox model is going backwards, not forwards.

[chinoyray]

BobSmith101 wrote...

chinoyray wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

chinoyray wrote...

IMO... all of the repetition and change of model for DA2 is because a 23GB PC game won't fit in a single DVD for the PS3 or Xbox 360.

Dragon Age: Origins (including all DLC) is 23.4GB
Dragon Age 2 is just 6.15GB

See what consoles can do for a good PC game?

It's all about the money and selling more copies.

Xbox, you have a point. PS3, do you know what the capacity of blu ray is ? Thought not .

At least get your facts right before you start "hating".

The packaging for the PS3 is not Blu-Ray (except Collector's Edition). I know that Blu-Ray contains 25GB but apparently, EA decided that not all the PS3 packaging will still be a DVD. 

Get your facts right before you start saying something like this very line. 

That's not a limitation of the PS3. That's EA cost cutting.

We both know that. I'm not hating any console. I have all of them. What I'm just saying is... EA has to make lots of money. Thus the reason they will publish the game in all 3 platforms. PC, Xbox360 and PS3. Thus the reason why DA2 only has 6GB and possibly another explanation why the assets of the game is repetitive. To save space.