275 réponses à ce sujet

[orbit991]

captain.subtle wrote...

Hands down Obsidian. I believe everyone will agree. They make far better sequels.

They did well on FOLV, to me it was much more interesting then what Bethesda did. Better writing, voice acting and general theme is what stood out for me.

[mordarwarlock]

I could wait 999 years for all I care, a great game delivered late beats a garbage game delivered tomorrow

[drvaughn1999]

DoNotIngest wrote...

How about if Bioware made DA2 in twice the time they actually did? Give a bit of closure, larger environment, new dungeons, and fix some bugs. And more party interaction, of course.

Then I could have played this game more than once.

[CRISIS1717]

No Blizzard are junk, they've been cheating people out of money for years and people are too addicted to care.

[Akka le Vil]

MingWolf wrote...

captain.subtle wrote...

Hands down Obsidian. I believe everyone will agree. They make far better sequels.

Well, no offense to Obsidian, but their sequel to Neverwinter Nights didn't exactly impress the NWN community.  I lot of people I know still refuse to acknowledge that there even is a NWN2.  In fact, the community reaction to DA2 now resembles that of NWN2 when that game first released

NWN2 was by far the worst game by Obsidian. In stark contrast with all their other games, scenario and writing were very average, and the followers completely forgettable. I'm still scratching my head wondering what happened.

Still, if only by the simple fact that NWN's OC was a steaming pile of dung, it managed to be a sequel much better than its first iteration, so we can say that Obsidian still manage to make better sequels

[ms_sunlight]

MingWolf wrote...

Well, no offense to Obsidian, but their sequel to Neverwinter Nights didn't exactly impress the NWN community.  I lot of people I know still refuse to acknowledge that there even is a NWN2.  In fact, the community reaction to DA2 now resembles that of NWN2 when that game first released

NWN2 is notable for being another game with  a much lower user score on Metacritic than reviewer score.  www.metacritic.com/game/pc/neverwinter-nights-2

For what it's worth, I loved NWN2 even though I'll admit it has its flaws.  One word for you people - Sand!

[LightningSamus]

No.

[MingWolf]

NWN2 was somewhat okay after the large stack of patches that Obsidian put in for that game. I was playing through it a little bit last night and I still cannot quite grasp the design of the game's interface. At least its more playable than when it first released. They at least responded pretty well to community criticism and responses, and so if there is one good thing I can say about them in terms of their end-product, its definitely that.

[Chewin]

DA II handled by Blizzard? Sure, why not. Maybe I'll have a good laugh

[Romantiq]

Blizzard has outstanding quality assurance and quality control. I can't say the same for BioWare's. <_<

Modifié par Romantiq, 02 avril 2011 - 07:24 .

[Lady Luck]

Chewin3 wrote...

DA II handled by Blizzard? Sure, why not. Maybe I'll have a good laugh

In how much it will fail? I'll join you in that

[astrallite]

Blizzard would polish a turd. While the combat would be better, less bugs, the game would actually perform well on most hardware, and there wouldn't be teleporting ninja dog mobs, this is not a genre they have any experience at.

And Blizzard can work as long as they want on a game because they aren't controlled by Activision. Blizzard's holding company Vivdendi ACQUIRED Activision, not the other way around. If anything, Blizzard tells Activision how it is because they have seniority in an established business. Their business relationship is more or less the complete opposite of Bioware, who has to answer to EA.

Modifié par astrallite, 02 avril 2011 - 07:28 .

[Akka le Vil]

astrallite wrote...

Blizzard would polish a turd. While the combat would be better, less bugs, the game would actually perform well on most hardware, and there wouldn't be teleporting ninja dog mobs, this is not a genre they have any experience at.

And Blizzard can work as long as they want on a game because they aren't controlled by Activision. Blizzard's holding company Vivdendi ACQUIRED Activision, not the other way around. If anything, Blizzard tells Activision how it is because they have seniority in an established business. Their business relationship is more or less the complete opposite of Bioware, who has to answer to EA.

And yet, since they fused with Activision, they suddendly stopped making games for gamers and started milking and dumbing down.

Facts > theory

[Sanguinerin]

Despite Dragon Age II, I still believe that BioWare is capable of delivering a good game. I'm certainly going to be more hesitant from now on, as BioWare has just been proven to not be the perfect gaming company that I previously held them up to be. I got caught up in the hype of free stuff, perhaps. I'm now a bit afraid of buying a game that advertise so many free items because in the end, they didn't make up for the severely lacking content in the game.

Would I want Blizzard to pick up the Dragon Age setting, though? No. I love Blizzard games as well but I love them for different expectations and different reasons. I'm going to cross my fingers and hope that BioWare actually gives more thought and time to whatever comes next for Dragon Age, but my future purchases will have to go through a lot more consideration.

Modifié par HallowedWarden, 02 avril 2011 - 07:39 .

[astrallite]

Akka le Vil wrote...

astrallite wrote...

Blizzard would polish a turd. While the combat would be better, less bugs, the game would actually perform well on most hardware, and there wouldn't be teleporting ninja dog mobs, this is not a genre they have any experience at.

And Blizzard can work as long as they want on a game because they aren't controlled by Activision. Blizzard's holding company Vivdendi ACQUIRED Activision, not the other way around. If anything, Blizzard tells Activision how it is because they have seniority in an established business. Their business relationship is more or less the complete opposite of Bioware, who has to answer to EA.

And yet, since they fused with Activision, they suddendly stopped making games for gamers and started milking and dumbing down.

Facts > theory

The only game they've made since the Activision merger is Starcraft 2, and there's nothing dumbed down about it.

[Romantiq]

astrallite wrote...

Akka le Vil wrote...

astrallite wrote...

Blizzard would polish a turd. While the combat would be better, less bugs, the game would actually perform well on most hardware, and there wouldn't be teleporting ninja dog mobs, this is not a genre they have any experience at.

And Blizzard can work as long as they want on a game because they aren't controlled by Activision. Blizzard's holding company Vivdendi ACQUIRED Activision, not the other way around. If anything, Blizzard tells Activision how it is because they have seniority in an established business. Their business relationship is more or less the complete opposite of Bioware, who has to answer to EA.

And yet, since they fused with Activision, they suddendly stopped making games for gamers and started milking and dumbing down.

Facts > theory

The only game they've made since the Activision merger is Starcraft 2, and there's nothing dumbed down about it.

Absolutely. Great, polished game with amazing multifunctional toolset.

Your "facts" are wrong Akka le Vil.

[88mphSlayer]

Blizzard is probably the best in the rpg industry at making good fun gameplay

and they're one of the best at cgi cutscenes and music

but they've never been a single-player non-linear kind of developer, it would be a very different game - good but not a bioware-esque rpg, CDProjektRED and Obsidian have more in common

[ZombiePowered]

I find Blizzard is much more gameplay oriented. Their games are very fun to play, but while they can craft a solid story, they can't do it nearly as well as Bioware. I wouldn't want Blizzard handling Bioware games any more than I'd wanted Bioware to take over Blizzard. They're different companies with different focuses.

[Aradace]

Wait 10 years for a sequel? No thanks. 2-3years sure, but a sodding decade? Nahhhhh....

[ink07]

Packofpickledpeppers wrote...

Theres been a few of these topics but I havent seen anyone make the best one yet.

"Would Dragon Age 2 be better if it was made by Obsidion?

Now THAT would be a great topic.

As far as this topic goes though, the combat, at least in DAO and partially in DA2, was so similar to WoW that yeah, I think Blizzard probably would have handled DA2 pretty well. It may have taken 10 years to release, but it would have been quality.  It would have paid more attention to the lore, and it probably would have had large seamless areas with many cities, and various types of mounts to travel between them with.

If made by Obsidian, it would be much better written, probably have twice the amount of skills, dialogue lines and content in general, but it would also be twice as buggy. It would've stayed loyal to the original gampelay concept, and it would've expanded in those concepts disregarding flashy combat or awesome button. In the "looks" department I think it would be about the same (tho not as bland in its asset reuse), but much less optimized for PC. As always, in the technical department Obsidian is never up to par with their ambitions and scope, so the game would've been delayed 6mo-1year and still would've felt incomplete at release. It would've had worse grades but still be better regarded by gamers than how DA2 is now, some people would venture to call it a classic.


If made by Blizzard, the story would be campy, shorter and less elaborated. The skills would be much better balanced (much more for MP than SP) but the animations accompanying those skills would be average at best, tho probably more cartoony. It would have a big nice multiplayer component with a big emphasis on items and player interaction. It would probably be better looking overall but at the expense of detail, although almost any machine could run it at certain point.
It would've come out in late 2012 at the earliest to huge critical praise and DA3 would be another 6years+ away. Gamers would buy it and play it diligently for years to come forgetting the fact that it is a completely different game with probably no resemblance to the party based tactical RPG that was the first. (although, had Blizzard made the first game as well there is no reason to believe they would've abandoned their original concept had the game been received as well as DA:O was.)

Funny thing is I'd rather play any of those games than the rushed mess that is DA2.

Modifié par ink07, 02 avril 2011 - 08:10 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Hell no. Never.

I don't like Blizzards style. Cartoony desing and bad stories....

[AlexXIV]

I would prefer if Bioware just take the time to make another, improved DA:O (as in DA3 in quality and and size of DA:O). What DA2 should have been to begin with.

[Tommy6860]

What difference would that make? You still either get a hack-n-slash dungeon crawler game like Diablo (which I liked, but it was for that format), or an MMO like WOW (of which I couldn't care if that kind of gaming died). I don't want RPGs being what they have seemingly become today.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 02 avril 2011 - 08:56 .

[UltimoCrofto]

Dannybare wrote...

Blizzard is controlled by Activision, who I depise way more than EA.

They're actually not.

Take a look at the quality of StarCraft II, and the development cycle on Diablo III. Then look at the progression of World of Warcraft. Activision has had little-to-no effect on any of these titles what-so-ever. Everything -- even the bad stuff, like charging for pets and mounts in WoW -- is Blizzard's own choice and through their own cycles. Activision doesn't have the ability -- at this stage -- to tell Blizzard to do anything; if they did, then people would know about it.

I believed BioWare were also in the same category as Blizzard when EA bought them; that they retained their own independence and could work as they did before they had EA on-board. I still believed that only until DA2, since at this point it's hard to find any other excuses as to why the qualuty of the game is so dire, and why the development time was so ridiculous.

Also, I tend to agree with people here that although I think Blizzard are better at making polished games with more in-depth and enjoyable gameplay, BioWare have a better ability at delivering a story-driven and linear experience (though I refuse to include ME1/2 or DA2 in that example, since they lack good narratives), so I still prefer BioWare to be making Dragon Age for that reason.

I hear Obsidian being thrown about a bit here, but people are forgetting both KotOR II and Fallout: New Vegas are massively glitchy, buggy and unpolished experiences. If they were behind DA2 it may have turned out better in some ways, but suffered greatly in others. Neither Obsidian or BioWare are great examples of Western RPG developers when you see what they are capable of at their very worst.

Modifié par UltimoCrofto, 02 avril 2011 - 09:18 .

[nopho]

may sound weired but i loved both, Nwn2 and Kotor2 (with the later clearly being a rush job but with cool features and a story i liked much)

blizzard...makes really fun to play games but for the hell of it those people got no idea how to make a good story