966 réponses à ce sujet

[SoR82]

Volourn wrote...

"Ive said it before I'll say it again you sir are a guaranteed laugh, you state that peoples opinions are not fact and then proceed to tell us that your opinions ARE fact."

A good laugh is hearty for the soul so please thank me and I will say your welcome. I'm polite that way.:0

P.S. I use quotes. The 'quote button' is for noobs as I much prefer the old fashion way I was taught in school way back in ancient times.

Ah well they should have taught you it helps to tell people who you are quoting....

[Volourn]

Who I'm quoting shouldn't matter but the substance of the quote. Let's not be egosticial and make this about individuals but about the actual subject we're discussing.

[sympathy4saren]

Remember...this is coming from a primarily pause and player pc guy!

[SoR82]

Volourn wrote...

Who I'm quoting shouldn't matter but the substance of the quote. Let's not be egosticial and make this about individuals but about the actual subject we're discussing.

Genius!

So next time I want to prove a point ill just write any old thing in quotes and thats finnnnne because its what we are talking about it doesnt matter who... if indeed anyone said it. That sir is truly fantastic


~chuckles~

[Teredan]

Volourn wrote...

Who I'm quoting shouldn't matter but the substance of the quote. Let's not be egosticial and make this about individuals but about the actual subject we're discussing.

What ? I don't believe you know what that word means?
Or explain to since when it's egoistical to appreciate clear and well structured responses.
Who you're quoting is indeed important if you're only quoting part of their posts.
The parts your quoting could be pulled quite out of context which can lead to misunderstandings.

[Volourn]

"So next time I want to prove a point ill just write any old thing in quotes and thats finnnnne because its what we are talking about it doesnt matter who... if indeed anyone said it. That sir is truly fantastic"

Well, if you make up quotes or purposefully misquote someone to be a jerk as opposed to being funny then that's on you.

I have never purposefully misquoted someone outside of an obvious joke not seriously and I've made it clear.

The quotes are always legit, and the eprson I'm quoting will likely know I'm quoting them. Though it shouldn't matter. These are the DA2 forums. Posts should about DA2 not individual losers like myself.

[SoR82]

Volourn wrote...

"So next time I want to prove a point ill just write any old thing in quotes and thats finnnnne because its what we are talking about it doesnt matter who... if indeed anyone said it. That sir is truly fantastic"

Well, if you make up quotes or purposefully misquote someone to be a jerk as opposed to being funny then that's on you.

I have never purposefully misquoted someone outside of an obvious joke not seriously and I've made it clear.

The quotes are always legit, and the eprson I'm quoting will likely know I'm quoting them. Though it shouldn't matter. These are the DA2 forums. Posts should about DA2 not individual losers like myself.

Er did I misread this or did you call yourself an individual loser?

Lol your really missing this arent you in threads this long posts get lost easy people quote what somene said sometimes half a dozen pages ago. But you carry on certainly

[rolson00]

heya people was just reading through the posts on da2 and came across this thread


http://social.biowar...index/7154827/1

it has at the start some very interesting posts from david gaider, but let me show you what really spoke volumes to me.

David Gaider Wrote...

If you felt less connected to your followers, that's too bad. There could be many reasons for that, but if the requirement to someone feeling connected is having long, rambling conversations in the party camp... I can safely say that's unlikely to happen again. I could see front-loading the characters a bit more so players are more thoroughly introduced (as it was, a lot of the character interaction ended up in Act 2 quite by accident) but I have absolutely no intention of returning to the reams of expository dialogue as a replacement for character development anytime soon.

you cannot believe the disapointment i felt when i read that. that is as good as saying "da3 is going to be like da2"
add that and the interview and and boom .

it seems that the da team only make games for people who play through once, i have played through well over severn times i had to delete serveral charecters to do this.

 i love learning about the background of the world and party members from the characters.  i never read the codex once.

i'm one of the people that got the short end of the stick, a lot of what i loved in da:o was taken out, races, da:o party banter, the ability to equip party members, i really don't see why bioware had a problem with us putting wynne or morrigan in armor after all thats how [b]we wanted to play it.
 
i hope we get a well balanced mix of da:o & da2  but sadly it seems i'm one of the little people who don't matter any more

Modifié par rolson00, 22 avril 2011 - 08:57 .

[Volourn]

"Er did I misread this or did you call yourself an individual loser? "

I post on a forum dedicated to a game. I'm the very of a loser. Just sayin'.


"Lol your really missing this arent you in threads this long posts get lost easy people quote what somene said sometimes half a dozen pages ago. But you carry on certainly"

Again, as long as the quote is accurate, it shouldn't matter who I'm actually quoting.

[Yrkoon]

rolson00 wrote...

heya people was just reading through the posts on da2 and came across this thread


http://social.biowar...index/7154827/1

it has at the start some very interesting posts from david gaider, but let me show you what really spoke volumes to me.

David Gaider Wrote...

If you felt less connected to your followers, that's too bad. There could be many reasons for that, but if the requirement to someone feeling connected is having long, rambling conversations in the party camp... I can safely say that's unlikely to happen again. I could see front-loading the characters a bit more so players are more thoroughly introduced (as it was, a lot of the character interaction ended up in Act 2 quite by accident) but I have absolutely no intention of returning to the reams of expository dialogue as a replacement for character development anytime soon.

you cannot believe the disapointment i felt when i read that. that is as good as saying "da3 is going to be like da2"
add that and the interview and and boom .

it seems that the da team only make games for people who play through once, i have played through well over severn times i had to delete serveral charecters to do this.

 i love learning about the background of the world and party members from the characters.  i never read the codex once.

i'm one of the people that got the short end of the stick, a lot of what i loved in da:o was taken out, races, da:o party banter, the ability to equip party members, i really don't see why bioware had a problem with us putting wynne or morrigan in armor after all thats how [b]we wanted to play it.
 
i hope we get a well balanced mix of da:o & da2  but sadly it seems i'm one of the little people who don't matter any more

Ugh....

And to think, David Gaider is an accomplished writer.  He writes  novels for a living.  It boggles the mind that he sees  extended expository dialogue  with companions as  "a thing of the past" -- something he doesn't ever want to go back to doing.    I wonder how he'd feel if his publisher had demanded that he  remove 100 pages of his last novel and replace them with crude drawings, instead of words.  


On second read, scrap that.    This is not the  art direction/evolution based decision  that he's making it out to be.   The fact is, it's not his choice at all.   This is a financial decision from higher up, and nothing more.  He's just too proud to tell it like it is:  Bioware must cut corners and  can no longer afford to incorporate these  companion dialogues in their games.    

And that's a sad state of affairs, considering  extensive companion dialogues have  been a staple in their games since  Neverwinter Nights came out a decade ago.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 23 avril 2011 - 02:17 .

[1000questions]

Brockololly wrote...

I posted this in another thread, but figure it'll get buried there. From Game Informer:

Just some excerpts:

Many of the caves and building interiors are repeated, even though  the locations are supposed to be different. What kind of limitations  necessitated this decision?

In the balance of production, we  realized that we had capacity to create and maintain more stories,  content, and encounters than we could necessarily create unique levels  for, so we made the call to re-use some of the caves and other levels in the interest of providing more sidequests and encounters

Do you see Dragon Age ever revisiting the traditional tactical gameplay found in Origins?

It really depends on the definition of tactical. For some, it simply  means "slower." For others it means more complicated combat scenarios  and more engaging/challenging foes. To the former, I would say no. I  personally find the responsiveness and personality of the new combat  system to be much better for Dragon Age as a whole. My experience with the game feels more like I'm in control, rather than issuing orders, and
that direct correlation to my actions is something I really enjoy.  This is speaking as a habitual PC pause-and-player.

Meredith plays a significant role late in the story, but is largely  absent for the rest of the game. Why keep a prominent antagonist in the background for so long?

The "prominent antagonist" is a  staple of fantasy, be it the brooding eye of Sauron or the endless
hordes of the archdemon. For Dragon Age II, we wanted to attempt  something different and break the mold and try to vilify circumstance,  rather than a specific evil. It's a story of how heroes are made, not  born, and I think that by the same token, it's a story of how the  antagonist need not always be the villain. To me, that's a very human  tale. I believe the early game likely could have used some additional  appearances by Meredith, but we were likely being over-cautious of her  being perceived as a source of confusion or frustration for players: "I  think she's important, but she feels disconnected from my current  goals!"

What would you say to the PC gamer who feels like Dragon Age II was "dumbed down" compared to Origins?

I would suggest that they play on Hard, frankly. Origins on normal  delivered a pretty painful experience on the PC if you were new to RPGs, and I firmly believe that it turned people off. There's a very clear  "skill gap" between someone new to Dragon Age II and a returning Origins player, and I think it's very easy to forget how steep that learning  curve could be once you've overcome it.As such, we've made the early  game quests and encounters more forgiving, especially on normal, to help someone just getting their feet under them acclimate. Hard, however,  presents a solid, and consistent challenge to  veterans, and one where I think teamwork, pause and-play, and smart thinking are all quite important.

Well, it clearly shows that they dont give a damn about what we think. They will create future DA games in same way as DA2 .....

NO LESSONS LEARNT.... the interview just shows the arrogance and stubborn persistence on the fact that they believe what they did was right and IS STILL THE WAY TO GO FORWARD

[Volourn]

Why should theyc are what YOu think? Why should they care what i think? Gaider doesn't work for us. he works for the BIO docs, and the rest of the EA board. He answers to them, and only them.

[1000questions]

Volourn wrote...

Why should theyc are what YOu think? Why should they care what i think? Gaider doesn't work for us. he works for the BIO docs, and the rest of the EA board. He answers to them, and only them.

Incase you forgot the VERY EXISTENCE OF EA/BIOWARE AND SUCH COMPANIES RELIES ON people like us THE CUSTOMERS/GAMERS... got it

but I think you wont

[Volourn]

The very existence of us gamers/customers depends on companies such as EA/BIO.

You wouldn't be playing games if theyw eren't making them. And, they're making them because they know there's a market for suckers who enjoy playing video games.

[SoR82]

Volourn wrote...

The very existence of us gamers/customers depends on companies such as EA/BIO.

You wouldn't be playing games if theyw eren't making them. And, they're making them because they know there's a market for suckers who enjoy playing video games.

you forgot your precious quotation marks that tells us your quoting someone....

Its a two way relationship they wouldnt make games if people didnt buy them and people obviously couldnt play them if they didnt make them... But you know what people managed to entertain themselves long before computers.

[Volourn]

I didn't quote anyone, though...

And, yes, it's a two way relationship. That's the point.

And, yes, we don't need games. That's why i wouldn't care if BIO no longer exists.

[SoR82]

Volourn wrote...
And, yes, we don't need games. That's why i wouldn't care if BIO no longer exists.

Bang and they were just starting to love the white knight in shining armour leaping to their defence everytime.

[Volourn]

Why do you lie? I don't 'defend' BIO at every time... Or have missed all my S;RPG sucks and KOTOR is overrated p[osts/ WOWSERS!

Or did you miss my DA2 reveiw where I criticize the game?

R00fles!

Ignorance is everywhere.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

SoR82 wrote...

Volourn wrote...
And, yes, we don't need games. That's why i wouldn't care if BIO no longer exists.

Bang and they were just starting to love the white knight in shining armour leaping to their defence everytime.

This actually make me choke. I couldn't resist but laughing loudly. Ah well... at least it safe to brand Volourn as double crosser on both sides, A rare quality from someone who loathe himself as part of the customers. 

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 23 avril 2011 - 03:15 .

[JasonPogo]

God all I can say is I will be taking a wait and see approch to any games that have Mike Laidlaw on them. The man ruined a masterpiece. Ninja flips and no story do not a good game make.

[Logikal1]

JasonPogo wrote...

God all I can say is I will be taking a wait and see approch to any games that have Mike Laidlaw on them. The man ruined a masterpiece. Ninja flips and no story do not a good game make.

As will I

[Yrkoon]

Volourn wrote...

Why should theyc are what YOu think? Why should they care what i think? Gaider doesn't work for us. he works for the BIO docs, and the rest of the EA board. He answers to them, and only them.

This is irrelevant, too.  It's not up to Volourn to  decide what we say or don't say on these forums. 

Modifié par Yrkoon, 23 avril 2011 - 05:11 .

[hawkens982]

Brockololly wrote...

I posted this in another thread, but figure it'll get buried there. From Game Informer:

Just some excerpts:

Many of the caves and building interiors are repeated, even though  the locations are supposed to be different. What kind of limitations  necessitated this decision?

In the balance of production, we  realized that we had capacity to create and maintain more stories,  content, and encounters than we could necessarily create unique levels  for, so we made the call to re-use some of the caves and other levels in the interest of providing more sidequests and encounters

Do you see Dragon Age ever revisiting the traditional tactical gameplay found in Origins?

It really depends on the definition of tactical. For some, it simply  means "slower." For others it means more complicated combat scenarios  and more engaging/challenging foes. To the former, I would say no. I  personally find the responsiveness and personality of the new combat  system to be much better for Dragon Age as a whole. My experience with the game feels more like I'm in control, rather than issuing orders, and
that direct correlation to my actions is something I really enjoy.  This is speaking as a habitual PC pause-and-player.

Meredith plays a significant role late in the story, but is largely  absent for the rest of the game. Why keep a prominent antagonist in the background for so long?

The "prominent antagonist" is a  staple of fantasy, be it the brooding eye of Sauron or the endless
hordes of the archdemon. For Dragon Age II, we wanted to attempt  something different and break the mold and try to vilify circumstance,  rather than a specific evil. It's a story of how heroes are made, not  born, and I think that by the same token, it's a story of how the  antagonist need not always be the villain. To me, that's a very human  tale. I believe the early game likely could have used some additional  appearances by Meredith, but we were likely being over-cautious of her  being perceived as a source of confusion or frustration for players: "I  think she's important, but she feels disconnected from my current  goals!"

What would you say to the PC gamer who feels like Dragon Age II was "dumbed down" compared to Origins?

I would suggest that they play on Hard, frankly. Origins on normal  delivered a pretty painful experience on the PC if you were new to RPGs, and I firmly believe that it turned people off. There's a very clear  "skill gap" between someone new to Dragon Age II and a returning Origins player, and I think it's very easy to forget how steep that learning  curve could be once you've overcome it.As such, we've made the early  game quests and encounters more forgiving, especially on normal, to help someone just getting their feet under them acclimate. Hard, however,  presents a solid, and consistent challenge to  veterans, and one where I think teamwork, pause and-play, and smart thinking are all quite important.

Is this really a new interview? It just seems like Laidlaw is just spewing the same stuff from pre-release. When he said "re-used some of the caves and other levels", I'm pretty sure he was convinced by his own lies. It was more of "we re-used that one single cave".

IMO Laidlaw and Bioware should just stop trying to patch up their mistakes and just come clean and say yes, mistakes were made, and we aim to improve these areas in DA3, rather than say, well the gamers were idiots for not increasing the difficulty level and they got roflstomped in DAO.

[doomsteel]

ONE CAVE! one stinkin cave

[SoR82]

doomsteel wrote...

ONE CAVE! one stinkin cave

Oh but you see this was okay because they gave us mor.... nah I wont lie for them even sarcastically.