374 réponses à ce sujet

[jjkrogs]

Pwnzor326 wrote...

jjkrogs wrote...
Of the last 5 PC games I've purchased, only 3 were even playable day one, and another had significant bugs that made gameplay frustrating. This is a downward trend, and yes, some of it has to do with the wider range of PCs out there today compared to a few years ago. But mostly it's because developers have cut corners (staff decrease, quality testing, increased release rates).

You realize this isn't a new thing for PC gaming, if anything games run better now adays because since they are made for consoles as well they can be run on a much wider range of pcs.

Better than the mid-90's, yes, when you had DOS problems, etc.  But no way are games released better today than they were even 5 years ago.  All PC games have bugs on release, obviously, but only the last 2-3 years have many been unplayable on day 1 for one reason or another.  At least in my experience.

The only games that were playable on day 1 for me within the last year were Fallout NV and Civ V.

Modifié par jjkrogs, 27 mars 2011 - 06:26 .

[MTN Dew Fanatic]

Judging by how quickly DA2 was developed; I'll just save the money for Skyrim, because I won't have time to save up money for both.

[jjkrogs]

Spuudle wrote...

jjkrogs wrote...

Pwnzor326 wrote...

jjkrogs wrote...
Of the last 5 PC games I've purchased, only 3 were even playable day one, and another had significant bugs that made gameplay frustrating. This is a downward trend, and yes, some of it has to do with the wider range of PCs out there today compared to a few years ago. But mostly it's because developers have cut corners (staff decrease, quality testing, increased release rates).

You realize this isn't a new thing for PC gaming, if anything games run better now adays because since they are made for consoles as well they can be run on a much wider range of pcs.

Better than the mid-90's, yes, when you had DOS problems, etc.  But no way are games released better today than they were even 5 years ago.  All PC games have bugs on release, obviously, but only the last 2-3 years have many been unplayable on day 1 for one reason or another.  At least in my experience.

The only games that were playable on day 1 for me within the last year were Fallout NV and Civ V.

Ha Ha. I remember in the early eighties when I started playing games with my Spectrum ZX80 and CmdrVic20. Would be in town on saturday morning with my pocket money at 9am at the local electronics store. Would spend every penny on about 6 games(on Tape.) Would then spend all day trying to get them to load.  Would then spend the rest of the weekend typing hundreds of qbasic lines from a book trying to get them working.  Jees it was frustrating....
 

But that was when you could actually return games to the store! 

[rpx78noob]

 if you want to be cool for about one month you better pre order...

[Paragon-King]

Why, yes. Yes, I'll preorder 'em all and then some!

[BeefoTheBold]

No, and it will be the first Bioware game ever that I haven't preordered the extra special edition as soon as it became available.

[dsmooth26]

this game is awful. Just beat it and it left me wanting more. ALOT more. No since of accomplishment at all. When I beat Origins i was happy and felt great about it. But this bull @#$@% that i just got done playing wad stight up bull @#$@. They better come out with a free expansion set for this that adds about 10 more hours of gameplay and tell me why the hell there where apperinces by people from the last game that had totally nothing to do with this one. Im just so at a loss for how bad this game is. Technically this game is awesome the gameplay is fantastic. Upset that I cannot switch weapon classes on the fly. Other than the story this was a good game. Cant wait till ME3 but this is it for dragon age for me this is bad bad bad..

[Eclipse_9990]

Only if Bioware preordered it for me... <_<

[GhostRed]

jjkrogs wrote...

Spuudle wrote...

jjkrogs wrote...

Pwnzor326 wrote...

jjkrogs wrote...
Of the last 5 PC games I've purchased, only 3 were even playable day one, and another had significant bugs that made gameplay frustrating. This is a downward trend, and yes, some of it has to do with the wider range of PCs out there today compared to a few years ago. But mostly it's because developers have cut corners (staff decrease, quality testing, increased release rates).

You realize this isn't a new thing for PC gaming, if anything games run better now adays because since they are made for consoles as well they can be run on a much wider range of pcs.

Better than the mid-90's, yes, when you had DOS problems, etc.  But no way are games released better today than they were even 5 years ago.  All PC games have bugs on release, obviously, but only the last 2-3 years have many been unplayable on day 1 for one reason or another.  At least in my experience.

The only games that were playable on day 1 for me within the last year were Fallout NV and Civ V.

Ha Ha. I remember in the early eighties when I started playing games with my Spectrum ZX80 and CmdrVic20. Would be in town on saturday morning with my pocket money at 9am at the local electronics store. Would spend every penny on about 6 games(on Tape.) Would then spend all day trying to get them to load.  Would then spend the rest of the weekend typing hundreds of qbasic lines from a book trying to get them working.  Jees it was frustrating....
 

But that was when you could actually return games to the store! 

I put my money on the primary cause of increased bugs (aside from more complicated coding with larger and larger games) being that they pretty much use the end user as their beta testers when they don't have a beta test.

You'll notice that only a few major titles in the last few years had open betas (at least titles with console versions, too).

A good example would be pitting MW2 against BFBC2 (and NOT in terms of which is better - let's not even go there) as to which one had an open beta versus which had a LARGE number of game-breaking bugs.

You can argue all day, but MW2 was a glitchfest from day 1, and while BFBC2 had its issues, they were mostly server load related and resolve after a couple weeks, and in no way game-breaking.

Guess which one had an open beta MONTHS before release and a playabled multiplayer demo a little over a month before release?  Right, BFBC2, the one with by far the fewest glitches.

Those who followed the Infinity Ward saga know that IW eventually admitted to only bug testing individual parts of the game as they were completed in very limited amounts, and not the entire game in its released version before release due to time constrictions placed on them by Activision to deliver.

They've reached a point where they think it's okay to release something and cross their fingers, wait for the fallout and deal with it on the back end.  They save money on development time and testing, knowing they'll get their money up front before any, if any, major issues are found.

The patch/update system has allowed them to become lazy and greedy.  The only way that will change is when it starts to impact sales.

[takfar]

No. I also did, for the first time ever, regret buying a Bioware game at full price. While the story and characters are interesting in DA2, it was quite clearly a rushed job (reused rooms? no item icons?). I will probably not be buying any DLC for it, either (I bought everything they released for ME2 and DAO).

Now DA3... if they take their time and user reviews confirm that they brought the game back to the level of DAO, I might buy it at full price. Otherwise, I'll wait for a price drop (I don't think a game like DAO is worth more than 30 dollars). As it stands now, I'll certainly *not* be preordering, tho.

[jjkrogs]

GhostRed wrote...

jjkrogs wrote...

Spuudle wrote...

jjkrogs wrote...

Pwnzor326 wrote...

jjkrogs wrote...
Of the last 5 PC games I've purchased, only 3 were even playable day one, and another had significant bugs that made gameplay frustrating. This is a downward trend, and yes, some of it has to do with the wider range of PCs out there today compared to a few years ago. But mostly it's because developers have cut corners (staff decrease, quality testing, increased release rates).

You realize this isn't a new thing for PC gaming, if anything games run better now adays because since they are made for consoles as well they can be run on a much wider range of pcs.

Better than the mid-90's, yes, when you had DOS problems, etc.  But no way are games released better today than they were even 5 years ago.  All PC games have bugs on release, obviously, but only the last 2-3 years have many been unplayable on day 1 for one reason or another.  At least in my experience.

The only games that were playable on day 1 for me within the last year were Fallout NV and Civ V.

Ha Ha. I remember in the early eighties when I started playing games with my Spectrum ZX80 and CmdrVic20. Would be in town on saturday morning with my pocket money at 9am at the local electronics store. Would spend every penny on about 6 games(on Tape.) Would then spend all day trying to get them to load.  Would then spend the rest of the weekend typing hundreds of qbasic lines from a book trying to get them working.  Jees it was frustrating....
 

But that was when you could actually return games to the store! 

I put my money on the primary cause of increased bugs (aside from more complicated coding with larger and larger games) being that they pretty much use the end user as their beta testers when they don't have a beta test.

You'll notice that only a few major titles in the last few years had open betas (at least titles with console versions, too).

A good example would be pitting MW2 against BFBC2 (and NOT in terms of which is better - let's not even go there) as to which one had an open beta versus which had a LARGE number of game-breaking bugs.

You can argue all day, but MW2 was a glitchfest from day 1, and while BFBC2 had its issues, they were mostly server load related and resolve after a couple weeks, and in no way game-breaking.

Guess which one had an open beta MONTHS before release and a playabled multiplayer demo a little over a month before release?  Right, BFBC2, the one with by far the fewest glitches.

Those who followed the Infinity Ward saga know that IW eventually admitted to only bug testing individual parts of the game as they were completed in very limited amounts, and not the entire game in its released version before release due to time constrictions placed on them by Activision to deliver.

They've reached a point where they think it's okay to release something and cross their fingers, wait for the fallout and deal with it on the back end.  They save money on development time and testing, knowing they'll get their money up front before any, if any, major issues are found.

The patch/update system has allowed them to become lazy and greedy.  The only way that will change is when it starts to impact sales.

The problem with impacted sales is that they will misinterpret it as a decline in PC users and not a "PC users are tired of getting screwed", and therefore, they may decide to exclude PC release entirely.  But I agree that day one and week one gamers are beta testers anymore.

[Mercedes-Benz]

Yes.

[Black--Hand]

I wouldn't pre-order. Metacritic first.

[smjones23]

Yes. So many people on the forums are big babies.

[October Sixth]

There is no poll. Why is there no poll?

[_Aine_]

I generally don't pre-order. I wait and get a good look at what the game appears to be once it is closer to being finished first. I read critic reviews but they are only data for me not the be-all end-all, to see what I can discover about it to see if it is something I would like. I *did* pre-order DA2 because I loved DA:O so much though, as well as Witcher 2. I usually don't though.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Captain Crash wrote...

jwalker wrote...

Yes.

I dont even need to question it.  Of course Yes!!  

I on the other hand will decide when the time comes near, but based on the buggy and dumbed down state DA2 is in now I would say: I don't even need to question it. Of course No!!

[Scarzi]

No. They don't take their time making games, finally they made a pretty good combat system and interaction with your main character and everything else lacked. Simple as that.

[Celestria129]

Yes i would, because I truly enjoy playing DA2, working on my 5th play-through and I am still enjoying it.

[eeeky]

it would depend on the story for DA3, personally i didnt like the story for DA2 i say DA:O had more of a story than DA2 but the improved speaking and fighting mechanics kept me interested.

[erynnar]

No. And for those doing name calling (ie big babies) I would say it takes one to know one.

I won't pre-order because DA2 is not a sequel (Finding Morrigan and the God-child, or helping Morrigan hunt Flemeth--depending on you DAO choices--or hunting the Archtect) those would have been sequels to DAO. This is adventures in Kirkwall, not DA2.

This is a good, seperate game on its own that uses the DA universe. I have to say I like the combat animation, but they could slow it down more so I can see the cool moves my rogue is making (but not as slow as DAO). I don't like the Zerg fights. Waves and waves of enemies are not a challenge it is just boring and repetitive. But I do like the bloody explosions j/k. : D

I felt like DA2 was a big DLC with constant angty punches to the face. I am surprised Hawke doesn't go crazy and blow up the chantry (brother/sister dies, brother/sister becomes a Gray Warden/templar/Circle Mage, Fanken-Mom, Brother or sister hates you and can't stand to be near you later, your lover is crazy, or leaves you but may come back). I had less depression playing DAO you lose everything then have to save the world. The only light hearted thing that broke up the sadness and angst is getting Aveline laid which is hilarously funny. The banter is great, but it doesn't cut the tension like talking to companions in camp.

DAO was far more complex and is like playing a favorite book over and over and over again. I have no desire to re-play DA2. I was only the hero in killing the Arishok. Otherwise I run around (in the same dungeons over and over) being everyone's little errand girl in between killing enormous amounts of people who are thieves and highwaymen, and bandits (who are the same people with different tags over their heads) which makes me wonder why Kirkwall isn't emptier (come Fereldens! I Hawke have cleaned Kirwall out of most of it's population. Come, leave the sewers now!

I didn't get a really over reaching story, just a lot of small disjointed stories with a couple of larger arcs. So I don't really feel a connection to it like DAO.

I also dislike the convo wheel and it's lack of impact on the story, my actions too (does letting Bartrand live and go to the funny farm have any impact at all?)

I would have preferred if they had left Anders and Justice in Awakenings and created a mage who had been raised in the Kirkwall Circle and had been under Meredith's ever increasing crazy thumb to take Anders's spot. While bringing in Merrill and Isabela from DAO just to give one more connection to DAO. The mage from the circle at Kirkwall going nuts because the Grand Cleric won't do her job would be far more compelling to me, and bring me closer to the plight of the mages there and Kirkwall as my new home. Anders didn't come from there, and yes he was a mage, but it didn't draw me in as much as say the Head Enchanter, or the girl mage about to be made Tranquil. While I loved the totally revamped Merrill, I hate the Justice/Vengence lobotomized Anders I don't want to romance him, I want to stab him and put him out of his and my misery. I sorely miss my Alistair/Zev combo in that character.

Merrill however brings me to what I did like. I LOVE the companions (save the lobotomized Anders). They are funny, fun, sexy, and fantastic (Varric should have been romanceable. Yes Varric, it is the chesthair). I loved their clothes (although Isabela keeps getting a spot on her butt where the layer beneath shows through when she moves), though I wish you would make more sets for them (make them different and exclusive to them).

I love the companions quests, especially Aveline's (awkward silent stares across a pub table for the win!).

Overall, it is like with this game, not love, like DAO. It is a nice game, it entertains me and keeps me off the streets. And I may play it again, once I have set it aside for a while, or when I have writers block. But I would rather replay DAO and write fanfiction for same. DA2 is for when I am really bored. There are things I liked but did not adore like DAO, and things I really hated.

Maybe, just maybe they will combine the best of DA2 and DAO and DA3 will be something wonderful that I will want to replay over and over too. I just hope they stop going action/hack and slash with a little RPG to RPG with a little hack and slash.

No DA2 doesn't make me hate BioWare or EA. I am just disappointed on one level and meh (not in love) on another.

Modifié par erynnar, 28 mars 2011 - 11:00 .

[TOBY FLENDERSON]

NO, unless Bioware pulls a miracle and fixes all the bugs in DA2 and then releases DLC finishing the story of Hawke.

[Triceratops]

DA2 is the first game I've ever preordered. I'll definitely be preordering ME3 and DA3 now.

[Hoest]

Stephiphany wrote...

DA2 is the first game I've ever preordered. I'll definitely be preordering ME3 and DA3 now.

This.