832 réponses à ce sujet

[MonkeyLungs]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

MonkeyLungs wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

I like most of the improvements in DA2. Anyone who says it is not as tactical as DAO are completely blinded by butthurt fanrage, anyone who says it significantly shorter than DAO are completely blinded by butthurt fanrage, and anyone who says it looks bad are just blind period.

I know where BW were trying to take the series, and when taking that first step in evolving a franchise, mistakes can be made. These mistakes mainly being the lack of companion customisation, copy and pasted dungeons, lack of explorable locations (Outside Kirkwall), limited dialogue with companions, lack of strong emotional bonds with Hawkes family, and a sometimes an unreliable dialogue wheel. These things can be improved upon dramatically in DA3, and some could have been done if they didn't have the deadline set by EA.

The absolutely ridiculous gripes that some have with this game, however, just comes down to extreme butthurt fanrage.

Your gripes are ok because you are just pointing out mistakes but everyone else is just griping ridiculously? And of course you totally understand the evolution of the game Bioware was going for because of your intimate knowledge of the internal mechanisms that happened to force the game to be released after 15 month dev cycle?

Yes they are.

And it was stated by Inon Zur that EA wanted DA2 out as quickly as possible to capitlise on DAO's success.

Everybody knows EA pushed for fast release. The real question is why the developers went for it. I don't think they had to, Further all your gripes are pretty much the same as what most people who griped have griped about. Of course you are special so you wouldn't have noticed that. Cheers.

[MonkeyLungs]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

MonkeyLungs wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

I like most of the improvements in DA2. Anyone who says it is not as tactical as DAO are completely blinded by butthurt fanrage, anyone who says it significantly shorter than DAO are completely blinded by butthurt fanrage, and anyone who says it looks bad are just blind period.

I know where BW were trying to take the series, and when taking that first step in evolving a franchise, mistakes can be made. These mistakes mainly being the lack of companion customisation, copy and pasted dungeons, lack of explorable locations (Outside Kirkwall), limited dialogue with companions, lack of strong emotional bonds with Hawkes family, and a sometimes an unreliable dialogue wheel. These things can be improved upon dramatically in DA3, and some could have been done if they didn't have the deadline set by EA.

The absolutely ridiculous gripes that some have with this game, however, just comes down to extreme butthurt fanrage.

Your gripes are ok because you are just pointing out mistakes but everyone else is just griping ridiculously? And of course you totally understand the evolution of the game Bioware was going for because of your intimate knowledge of the internal mechanisms that happened to force the game to be released after 15 month dev cycle?

Yes they are.

And it was stated by Inon Zur that EA wanted DA2 out as quickly as possible to capitlise on DAO's success.

Everybody knows EA pushed for fast release. The real question is why the developers went for it. I don't think they had to, Further all your gripes are pretty much the same as what most people who griped have griped about. Of course you are special, so you wouldn't have noticed that. Cheers.

EDIT: Double post. Very sorry not intentional. Have no idea how it happened. Ninjas I think,

Modifié par MonkeyLungs, 21 mars 2011 - 05:09 .

[Aermas]

Evolution by definition is when something becomes more complex & more niched. What Bioware is doing is not evolution but de-evolution, they are peeing in the RPG gene pool.

Modifié par Aermas, 21 mars 2011 - 05:06 .

[Otterwarden]

Rawgrim wrote...

I don`t really see the logic in going for the CoD crowd as a new audience though. If Bioware wants to make rpgs, and Bethesda (for example) have a larger fanbase with their rpgs...wouldn`t it make more sense to try and go for the fans of The elder Scrolls games, and stuff like that?

One would think, if you were to make the assumption that they solely wanted to expand their audience base.  However, a big attraction for that crowd is the sandbox environment, and clearly that takes time and effort.  I get the feeling that Bioware wants to get on a year to year schedule with pre-set linear stories that have a lot of cinemagraphics in them, at least that is what the ME1 to ME2, DA:O to DA2 game shifts have suggested.

Modifié par Otterwarden, 21 mars 2011 - 05:12 .

[TJSolo]

Aermas wrote...

Evolution by definition is when something becomes more complex & more niched. What Bioware is doing is not evolution but de-evolution, they are peeing in the RPG gene pool.

Don't worry the word evolve as used by Mr. Laidlaw is meant as a buzzword that implies improvement through change. Much like all buzzwords coming from Bioware designers they were probably picked during some meetings with EA. It is CYA technique so that if none of Mr. Laidlaw's bosses can take issue with publicly released statements.

[Dudalizer]

It's just too bad their attempt to "appeal to a wider audience" was mediocre at best.

[Mightyg]

Dragon Age 2's flaws aside, I think he's on point with his assessment of RPG's. Look what has happened to the Japanese game industry. That's what happens to RPG's when you do the same thing over and over and over again. Personally I want more action oriented RPG's. It's exactly why Fallout 3, Borderlands, and Bioware games have been enjoyable and successful as of late. These products are far from perfect, and many have been dissappointing, because they raised their own bar, and many of us are expecting them to deliver on the gameplay, storyline, and world vision. Dragon Age 2 fell short on all 3, even though there was a lot of good stuff in it.

[lady constance]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

I like most of the improvements in DA2. Anyone who says it is not as tactical as DAO are completely blinded by butthurt fanrage, anyone who says it significantly shorter than DAO are completely blinded by butthurt fanrage, and anyone who says it looks bad are just blind period.

I know where BW were trying to take the series, and when taking that first step in evolving a franchise, mistakes can be made. These mistakes mainly being the lack of companion customisation, copy and pasted dungeons, lack of explorable locations (Outside Kirkwall), limited dialogue with companions, lack of strong emotional bonds with Hawkes family, and a sometimes an unreliable dialogue wheel. These things can be improved upon dramatically in DA3, and some could have been done if they didn't have the deadline set by EA.

The absolutely ridiculous gripes that some have with this game, however, just comes down to extreme butthurt fanrage.

Completely false. I recall the developers themselves saying DA2 was a shorter game than Origins.

[AtreiyaN7]

Aermas wrote...

Evolution by definition is when something becomes more complex & more niched. What Bioware is doing is not evolution but de-evolution, they are peeing in the RPG gene pool.

Try again (from the wikipedia since I'm too lazy to paste in multiple definitions):

Evolution (also known as biological or organic evolution) is the change over time in one or more inherited traits found in populations of organisms.[1] Inherited traits are particular distinguishing characteristics, including anatomical, biochemical or behavioural characteristics, that result from gene–environment interactions. Evolution may occur when there is variation of inherited traits within a population. The major sources of such variation are mutation, genetic recombination and gene flow.[2][3][4][5] Evolution has led to the diversification of all living organisms, which are described by Charles Darwin as endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful.[6]

Evolution doesn't mean that a system necessarily becomes more complex - all it is is a matter of an organism developing favorable traits that contribute to survival and/or allow it to fill a specific niche (favorable to its survival in all likelihood). Seriously, people should trying to twist definitions today.

If you look at any cave-dwelling organism, you'll find that the creature in question has "evolved" to live in darkness and has subsequently lost its sight. Why? Because sight isn't needed in the dark depths of a cave. It probably has other ways to sense its environment to compensate for the loss of eyesight, but I'm pretty sure you can't argue that it evolved to become more complex when it's effectively blind. The eye is a complex light-sensing organ, but if it serves no purpose, evolution dictates that it is discarded in favor of other adaptations.

[upsettingshorts]

Ever since I started mentally replacing every Aermas comment with a blank post, I've discovered my recurring headaches have greatly diminished. I recommend this treatment to everyone, really.

[Otterwarden]

Brenus wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

It will be interesting to see how many copies Skyrim sells. Should be a good indicator on how big the rpg market actually is.

Dont forget the Witcher 2!

I thought it was interesting that they postponed their launch in part in order to give DA fans the time to play DA2.  Think it will end up being a good strategy.

[TJSolo]

Mightyg wrote...

Dragon Age 2's flaws aside, I think he's on point with his assessment of RPG's. Look what has happened to the Japanese game industry. That's what happens to RPG's when you do the same thing over and over and over again. Personally I want more action oriented RPG's. It's exactly why Fallout 3, Borderlands, and Bioware games have been enjoyable and successful as of late. These products are far from perfect, and many have been dissappointing, because they raised their own bar, and many of us are expecting them to deliver on the gameplay, storyline, and world vision. Dragon Age 2 fell short on all 3, even though there was a lot of good stuff in it.

What has happened with the Japanese game industry? Looks like a country of gamers and developers that are satisifed with a certain story type but each game attempts to do something unique with the combat., the stuff sells. IF a western company could produce a product as stable and sellable as Pokemon they would.
Or are you referring to how jRPGs look to people that don't like jRPGs?

[Gibb_Shepard]

lady constance wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

I like most of the improvements in DA2. Anyone who says it is not as tactical as DAO are completely blinded by butthurt fanrage, anyone who says it significantly shorter than DAO are completely blinded by butthurt fanrage, and anyone who says it looks bad are just blind period.

I know where BW were trying to take the series, and when taking that first step in evolving a franchise, mistakes can be made. These mistakes mainly being the lack of companion customisation, copy and pasted dungeons, lack of explorable locations (Outside Kirkwall), limited dialogue with companions, lack of strong emotional bonds with Hawkes family, and a sometimes an unreliable dialogue wheel. These things can be improved upon dramatically in DA3, and some could have been done if they didn't have the deadline set by EA.

The absolutely ridiculous gripes that some have with this game, however, just comes down to extreme butthurt fanrage.

Completely false. I recall the developers themselves saying DA2 was a shorter game than Origins.

Significantly. 

And it really depends, took me 40 hours to beat all of DAO, i'm still in Act 2 in DA2 and have just reached the 40 hour mark.

[Aermas]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Aermas wrote...

Evolution by definition is when something becomes more complex & more niched. What Bioware is doing is not evolution but de-evolution, they are peeing in the RPG gene pool.

Try again (from the wikipedia since I'm too lazy to paste in multiple definitions):

Evolution (also known as biological or organic evolution) is the change over time in one or more inherited traits found in populations of organisms.[1] Inherited traits are particular distinguishing characteristics, including anatomical, biochemical or behavioural characteristics, that result from gene–environment interactions. Evolution may occur when there is variation of inherited traits within a population. The major sources of such variation are mutation, genetic recombination and gene flow.[2][3][4][5] Evolution has led to the diversification of all living organisms, which are described by Charles Darwin as endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful.[6]

Evolution doesn't mean that a system necessarily becomes more complex - all it is is a matter of an organism developing favorable traits that contribute to survival and/or allow it to fill a specific niche (favorable to its survival in all likelihood). Seriously, people should trying to twist definitions today.

If you look at any cave-dwelling organism, you'll find that the creature in question has "evolved" to live in darkness and has subsequently lost its sight. Why? Because sight isn't needed in the dark depths of a cave. It probably has other ways to sense its environment to compensate for the loss of eyesight, but I'm pretty sure you can't argue that it evolved to become more complex when it's effectively blind. The eye is a complex light-sensing organ, but if it serves no purpose, evolution dictates that it is discarded in favor of other adaptations.

*Steps up on soapbox

An ameba is not evolved' it is about as unevolved as you can get; there are a few proto-organic lifeforms but they only existed in the time of early earth. Since then they have gotten more & more complex. They became eel-like fish, then they got fins, the fins turned into feet, & then some grew horns some grew teeth, but they all developed more than the ameba. The ameba can exist in almost any environment but a deer can only live on temperate land & a clam can only live by the sea. Bioware is becoming the ameba because it thinks it can survive that way. It has lost it's horns, so that it can run through the trees but now the trolls are feasting on it. because it gave up the horns that once defended it.
*Steps off soapbox

[Meltemph]

What has happened with the Japanese game industry?

Went from 50% of the market in 2002 to about 10%? I'd say that is indicative of a problem.

[Aermas]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Ever since I started mentally replacing every Aermas comment with a blank post, I've discovered my recurring headaches have greatly diminished. I recommend this treatment to everyone, really.

Maybe I'll change my name so as to catch you off guard?

[TJSolo]

Meltemph wrote...

What has happened with the Japanese game industry?

Went from 50% of the market in 2002 to about 10%? I'd say that is indicative of a problem.

or indicative that Japan reached saturation before other countries.

[Meltemph]

or indicative that Japan reached saturation before other countries.

Umm...yes, saturation is the reason Japan is getting their asses handed to them, in terms of global appeal by EU and US developers.

[Mestesso]

cephasjames wrote...

DA2 is just one game. One game cannot make a whole company's idea of a genre go down hill. If DA3 continues down the path that runs away from traditional rpgs then I think "going down hill" can be used. But DA2 is just one game where they chose to try something different to see if it would work - for the sake of rpgs as a whole. Some will say it worked, some will say it didn't. BioWare will now look at that and learn. Will they get it immediately? I don't know. Will they make Origins 2? I don't know. But they'll learn from it. RPGs (since BioWare really is the rpg king) are not dead because of one game. Especially when so many people are vocal about it.

Yes DA2 is just one game but it isn't the only game ElectronicWare has produced that has caused people to think that they have abandoned traditional RPG design.  I think that ME2 combined with DA2 triggers your criteria for "going down hill" to be used.

[TJSolo]

Most Japanese developers don't give a rat's ass about global appeal just like how Western developers like Bioware are not bothering to do a language port of their games to Japan. West and East tastes in games don't match up a lot.

[Mestesso]

Meltemph wrote...

Umm...yes, saturation is the reason Japan is getting their asses handed to them...

Probably not the best wording in light of recent events.  Just sayin'.  (Meant seriously and as grim humor.)

[asaiasai]

It is this in a nut shell, with the drift of design concept from DAO to DA2 Bioware is trying to cater the game to a wider audience. The issue is what about RPGs turns off the FPS and TPS market segment, conversly what in the FPS or TPS segment turns off RPG fans? The issue is how to arrive at a balance where the core of each is given what they want. I think that is the impossible dream so the hammer will have to come down and squish one side or the other. Sure Bioware can drift into the more mainstream audience as it did with Mass Effect2 and DA2 but that WILL come at a cost (as it did with me and my decision to pass on DA2 until the price drop no matter how long that takes) to those folks who want more of a RPG experience. In the end Bioware will make some new friends at the cost of some old ones which is not really a gain it could be a loss actually. It will not be known how this will shake out whether this was a good or bad thing until sales numbers (which are not representative of the whole picture) and reviews are all taken into account. Interesting point to consider here is that some of the blow back (if any) may not even show until the next installment as there are some folks who pre ordered (purchased) and were disappointed who because of this disappointment will not purchase the next installment, it is because of this that any data concerning sales has to be looked at in that light. Sure according to the numbers DA2 maybe successful, but how many of the folks who actually pre ordered were happy with DA2 will pre order the next installment. That is the issue with experiments of this nature as the results will be years in the collecting and understanding.

On this note in response to Laidlaw which is the bigger gamble in the long run? Running the risk of alienating the core fan base due to the radical design changes the effect of which will not be known until the next product is due for market. Or is it less of a risk to make the changes in smaller steps, placating the core slowely introducing both rpg elements to the TPS and FPS fans, while introducing some TPS and FPS elements to the RPGers. My issue with DA2 is that the changes seemed to happen to fast, alot of the fiddely stuff that alot of RPGers like were removed for flashy combat animations in order to appeal to the wider market.

As for myself i cancelled my pre order after playing (if you call kiting mobs around for hours playing) and with the hatchet job done to both Mass Effect 2 and DA2 have come to the conclusion that Bioware game are NOT trash. They are however not the must have, pre order, take a week vacation off work, highly anticipated events that DAO was. So armed with this knowledge i save myself some money, disappointment and just wait until price and content balance out. It is not a big deal really but being on the boards and NOT buying DA2 are about the only ways i know to voice my discontent with the direction DA2 went, now it is up to Bioware management to decide who is more valuable of a customer and tailor thier games to that audience. If the folks who agree with me win that is ok, if not that is ok too it is not the end of the world, there are and probably will be other companies who will swoop in and fill that void. So in the end innovation WILL arrive it just may not be Bioware as the harbringer.

Asai

[Meltemph]

Most Japanese developers don't give a rat's ass about global appeal just like how Western developers like Bioware are not bothering to do a language port of their games to Japan. West and East tastes in games don't match up a lot.

Even Japanese gamers are buying less games(not buying more over seas games either, but that is besides the point). Your right the Japanese gamer want different things then the West(now), but not to long ago, most of the globe was eating up those Japanese games as much as if not more then Japan. And if you don't think Japanese companies care about the bottom line and global appeal, you're just fooling yourself. But, this discussion is so far off topic, that I'm just going to let it go, cause this is a hijack on a whole other level.

Modifié par Meltemph, 21 mars 2011 - 05:59 .

[Jitter]

Mightyg wrote...

Dragon Age 2's flaws aside, I think he's on point with his assessment of RPG's. Look what has happened to the Japanese game industry. That's what happens to RPG's when you do the same thing over and over and over again. Personally I want more action oriented RPG's. It's exactly why Fallout 3, Borderlands, and Bioware games have been enjoyable and successful as of late. These products are far from perfect, and many have been dissappointing, because they raised their own bar, and many of us are expecting them to deliver on the gameplay, storyline, and world vision. Dragon Age 2 fell short on all 3, even though there was a lot of good stuff in it.

Did the Japanese ever make RPG's ?

Happy eye'd tweens swinging 30 foot swords does not an RPG make. 
I looked it up .. i suppose they did. 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Japanese_role-playing_games_by_genre



Perhaps the target market for sexually frustrated people who get off on crayola girls went soft....

Modifié par Jitter, 21 mars 2011 - 06:17 .